In this work, we develop a hypothesis testing framework to determine whether pairwise comparison data is generated by an underlying \emph{generalized Thurstone model} $\mathcal{T}_F$ for a given choice function $F$. While prior work has predominantly focused on parameter estimation and uncertainty quantification for such models, we address the fundamental problem of minimax hypothesis testing for $\mathcal{T}_F$ models. We formulate this testing problem by introducing a notion of separation distance between general pairwise comparison models and the class of $\mathcal{T}_F$ models. We then derive upper and lower bounds on the critical threshold for testing that depend on the topology of the observation graph. For the special case of complete observation graphs, this threshold scales as $Θ((nk)^{-1/2})$, where $n$ is the number of agents and $k$ is the number of comparisons per pair. Furthermore, we propose a hypothesis test based on our separation distance, construct confidence intervals, establish time-uniform bounds on the probabilities of type I and II errors using reverse martingale techniques, and derive minimax lower bounds using information-theoretic methods. Finally, we validate our results through experiments on synthetic and real-world datasets.

We present the Hierarchical AI-Meteorologist, an LLM-agent system that generates explainable weather reports using a hierarchical forecast reasoning and weather keyword generation. Unlike standard approaches that treat forecasts as flat time series, our framework performs multi-scale reasoning across hourly, 6-hour, and daily aggregations to capture both short-term dynamics and long-term trends. Its core reasoning agent converts structured meteorological inputs into coherent narratives while simultaneously extracting a few keywords effectively summarizing the dominant meteorological events. These keywords serve as semantic anchors for validating consistency, temporal coherence and factual alignment of the generated reports. Using OpenWeather and Meteostat data, we demonstrate that hierarchical context and keyword-based validation substantially improve interpretability and robustness of LLM-generated weather narratives, offering a reproducible framework for semantic evaluation of automated meteorological reporting and advancing agent-based scientific reasoning.

Bold claims about AI's role in science-from "AGI will cure all diseases" to promises of radically accelerated discovery-raise a central epistemic question: do large language models (LLMs) truly generate new knowledge, or do they merely remix memorized fragments? We propose unlearning-as-ablation as a falsifiable probe of constructive scientific discovery. The idea is to systematically remove a target result together with its forget-closure (supporting lemmas, paraphrases, and multi-hop entailments) and then evaluate whether the model can re-derive the result from only permitted axioms and tools. Success would indicate generative capability beyond recall; failure would expose current limits. Unlike prevailing motivations for unlearning-privacy, copyright, or safety-our framing repositions it as an epistemic probe for AI-for-Science. We outline a minimal pilot in mathematics and algorithms to illustrate feasibility, and sketch how the same approach could later be extended to domains such as physics or chemistry. This is a position paper: our contribution is conceptual and methodological, not empirical. We aim to stimulate discussion on how principled ablation tests could help distinguish models that reconstruct knowledge from those that merely retrieve it, and how such probes might guide the next generation of AI-for-Science benchmarks.

Recognizing biomedical concepts in the text is vital for ontology refinement, knowledge graph construction, and concept relationship discovery. However, traditional concept recognition methods, relying on explicit mention identification, often fail to capture complex concepts not explicitly stated in the text. To overcome this limitation, we introduce MA-COIR, a framework that reformulates concept recognition as an indexing-recognition task. By assigning semantic search indexes (ssIDs) to concepts, MA-COIR resolves ambiguities in ontology entries and enhances recognition efficiency. Using a pretrained BART-based model fine-tuned on small datasets, our approach reduces computational requirements to facilitate adoption by domain experts. Furthermore, we incorporate large language models (LLMs)-generated queries and synthetic data to improve recognition in low-resource settings. Experimental results on three scenarios (CDR, HPO, and HOIP) highlight the effectiveness of MA-COIR in recognizing both explicit and implicit concepts without the need for mention-level annotations during inference, advancing ontology-driven concept recognition in biomedical domain applications. Our code and constructed data are available at https://github.com/sl-633/macoir-master.

Our objective is to infer the true hypothesis with low error, while minimizing the number of action sampled.

AI has the potential to transform scientific discovery by analyzing vast datasets with little human effort. However, current workflows often do not provide the accuracy or statistical guarantees that are needed. We introduce active measurement, a human-in-the-loop AI framework for scientific measurement. An AI model is used to predict measurements for individual units, which are then sampled for human labeling using importance sampling. With each new set of human labels, the AI model is improved and an unbiased Monte Carlo estimate of the total measurement is refined. Active measurement can provide precise estimates even with an imperfect AI model, and requires little human effort when the AI model is very accurate. We derive novel estimators, weighting schemes, and confidence intervals, and show that active measurement reduces estimation error compared to alternatives in several measurement tasks.

We study the hypothesis testing problem where the observed samples need not come from either of the specified hypotheses (distributions). In such a situation, we would like our test to be robust to this misspecification and output the distribution closer in Hellinger distance. If the underlying distribution is close to being equidistant from the hypotheses, then this would not be possible. Our main result is quantifying how close the underlying distribution has to be to either of the hypotheses. We also study the composite testing problem, where each hypothesis is a Hellinger ball around a fixed distribution. A generalized likelihood ratio test is known to work for this problem. We give an alternate test for the same.

The deep learning revolution has spurred a rise in advances of using AI in sciences. Within physical sciences the main focus has been on discovery of dynamical systems from observational data. Yet the reliability of learned surrogates and symbolic models is often undermined by the fundamental problem of non-uniqueness. The resulting models may fit the available data perfectly, but lack genuine predictive power. This raises the question: under what conditions can the systems governing equations be uniquely identified from a finite set of observations? We show, counter-intuitively, that chaos, typically associated with unpredictability, is crucial for ensuring a system is discoverable in the space of continuous or analytic functions. The prevalence of chaotic systems in benchmark datasets may have inadvertently obscured this fundamental limitation. More concretely, we show that systems chaotic on their entire domain are discoverable from a single trajectory within the space of continuous functions, and systems chaotic on a strange attractor are analytically discoverable under a geometric condition on the attractor. As a consequence, we demonstrate for the first time that the classical Lorenz system is analytically discoverable. Moreover, we establish that analytic discoverability is impossible in the presence of first integrals, common in real-world systems. These findings help explain the success of data-driven methods in inherently chaotic domains like weather forecasting, while revealing a significant challenge for engineering applications like digital twins, where stable, predictable behavior is desired. For these non-chaotic systems, we find that while trajectory data alone is insufficient, certain prior physical knowledge can help ensure discoverability. These findings warrant a critical re-evaluation of the fundamental assumptions underpinning purely data-driven discovery.

Sequential statistical protocols require meticulous state management and robust error handling -- challenges naturally suited to functional programming. We present a functional architecture for structural enforcement of statistical rigor in automated research systems (AI-Scientists). These LLM-driven systems risk generating spurious discoveries through dynamic hypothesis testing. We introduce the Research monad, a Haskell eDSL that enforces sequential statistical protocols (e.g., Online FDR (false discovery rate) control) using a monad transformer stack. To address risks in hybrid architectures where LLMs generate imperative code, we employ Declarative Scaffolding -- generating rigid harnesses that structurally constrain execution and prevent methodological errors like data leakage. We validate this approach through large-scale simulation (N=2000 hypotheses) and an end-to-end case study, demonstrating essential defense-in-depth for automated science integrity.

Science Archaeology Medieval duke's remains recount his grisly murder In 1272, Hungary's Béla of Macsó received over 23 sword gashes-and more. Breakthroughs, discoveries, and DIY tips sent every weekday. In 1272 CE, a Hungarian duke was murdered in cold blood. Details surrounding the grisly killing of the 13th century Hungarian duke named Béla of Macsó have remained murky for centuries. The duke met his demise at the hand of enemies, but far less is known about what motivated his killers or how the attack really unfolded.