With the increasing reliance on LLMs as research agents, distinguishing between LLM and human-generated ideas has become crucial for understanding the cognitive nuances of LLMs' research capabilities. While detecting LLM-generated text has been extensively studied, distinguishing human vs LLM-generated scientific idea remains an unexplored area. In this work, we systematically evaluate the ability of state-of-the-art (SOTA) machine learning models to differentiate between human and LLM-generated ideas, particularly after successive paraphrasing stages. Our findings highlight the challenges SOTA models face in source attribution, with detection performance declining by an average of 25.4\% after five consecutive paraphrasing stages. Additionally, we demonstrate that incorporating the research problem as contextual information improves detection performance by up to 2.97%. Notably, our analysis reveals that detection algorithms struggle significantly when ideas are paraphrased into a simplified, non-expert style, contributing the most to the erosion of distinguishable LLM signatures.

The creative potential of computers has intrigued researchers for decades. Since the emergence of Generative AI (Gen AI), computer creativity has found many new dimensions and applications. As Gen AI permeates mainstream discourse and usage, researchers are delving into how it can improve and complement what humans do. Creative potential is a highly relevant notion to design practice and research, especially in the initial stages of ideation and conceptualisation. There is scope to improve creative potential in these stages, especially using machine intelligence. We propose a structured ideation session involving inspirational stimuli and utilise Gen AI in delivering this structure to designers through ALIA: Analogical LLM Ideation Agent, a tool for small-group ideation scenarios. The tool is developed by enabling speech based interactions with a Large Language Model (LLM) for inference generation. Inspiration is drawn from the synectic ideation method and the dialectics philosophy to design the optimal stimuli in group ideation. The tool is tested in design ideation sessions to compare the output of the AI-assisted ideation sessions to that of tradi tional ideation sessions. Preliminary findings showcase that participants have rated their ideas better when assisted by ALIA and respond favourably to speech-based interactions.

Large Language Models (LLMs) hold substantial potential for accelerating academic ideation but face critical challenges in grounding ideas and mitigating confirmation bias for further refinement. We propose integrating motivational knowledge graphs and socratic dialogue to address these limitations in enhanced LLM ideation (MotivGraph-SoIQ). This novel framework provides essential grounding and practical idea improvement steps for LLM ideation by integrating a Motivational Knowledge Graph (MotivGraph) with a Q-Driven Socratic Ideator. The MotivGraph structurally stores three key node types(problem, challenge and solution) to offer motivation grounding for the LLM ideation process. The Ideator is a dual-agent system utilizing Socratic questioning, which facilitates a rigorous refinement process that mitigates confirmation bias and improves idea quality across novelty, experimental rigor, and motivational rationality dimensions. On the ICLR25 paper topics dataset, MotivGraph-SoIQ exhibits clear advantages over existing state-of-the-art approaches across LLM-based scoring, ELO ranking, and human evaluation metrics.

Large Language Models (LLMs) are catalyzing a paradigm shift in scientific discovery, evolving from task-specific automation tools into increasingly autonomous agents and fundamentally redefining research processes and human-AI collaboration. This survey systematically charts this burgeoning field, placing a central focus on the changing roles and escalating capabilities of LLMs in science. Through the lens of the scientific method, we introduce a foundational three-level taxonomy-Tool, Analyst, and Scientist-to delineate their escalating autonomy and evolving responsibilities within the research lifecycle. We further identify pivotal challenges and future research trajectories such as robotic automation, self-improvement, and ethical governance. Overall, this survey provides a conceptual architecture and strategic foresight to navigate and shape the future of AI-driven scientific discovery, fostering both rapid innovation and responsible advancement. Github Repository: https://github.com/HKUST-KnowComp/Awesome-LLM-Scientific-Discovery.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is accelerating the transformation of scientific research paradigms, not only enhancing research efficiency but also driving innovation. We introduce InternAgent, a unified closed-loop multi-agent framework to conduct Autonomous Scientific Research (ASR) across various scientific research fields, enabling researchers to tackle complicated problems in these fields with unprecedented speed and precision. InternAgent highlights three key advantages: 1) Scalability: InternAgent has demonstrated its versatility across 12 scientific research tasks, capable of generating innovative ideas to enhance the performance of baseline code. 2) Interactivity: InternAgent provides an interface for human expert feedback and multi-agent interaction in automated end-to-end processes, allowing for the seamless integration of domain expert knowledge. 3) Efficiency: InternAgent has achieved promising performance gains in several scientific fields with significantly less time cost compared to human efforts. For instance, in reaction yield prediction, it increased from 27.6% to 35.4% in just 12 hours; in enhancer activity prediction, accuracy rose from 0.65 to 0.79 with only 4 hours of processing; and in 2D semantic segmentation, precision advanced from 78.8% to 81.0% in a mere 30 hours.

Scientific innovation is undergoing a paradigm shift driven by the rapid advancement of Large Language Models (LLMs). As science faces mounting challenges including information overload, disciplinary silos, and diminishing returns on conventional research methods, LLMs are emerging as powerful agents capable not only of enhancing scientific workflows but also of participating in and potentially leading the innovation process. Existing surveys mainly focus on different perspectives, phrases, and tasks in scientific research and discovery, while they have limitations in understanding the transformative potential and role differentiation of LLM. This survey proposes a comprehensive framework to categorize the evolving roles of LLMs in scientific innovation across three hierarchical levels: Evaluator, Collaborator, and Scientist. We distinguish between LLMs' contributions to structured scientific research processes and open-ended scientific discovery, thereby offering a unified taxonomy that clarifies capability boundaries, evaluation criteria, and human-AI interaction patterns at each level. Through an extensive analysis of current methodologies, benchmarks, systems, and evaluation metrics, this survey delivers an in-depth and systematic synthesis on LLM-driven scientific innovation. We present LLMs not only as tools for automating existing processes, but also as catalysts capable of reshaping the epistemological foundations of science itself. This survey offers conceptual clarity, practical guidance, and theoretical foundations for future research, while also highlighting open challenges and ethical considerations in the pursuit of increasingly autonomous AI-driven science. Resources related to this survey can be accessed on GitHub at: https://github.com/haoxuan-unt2024/llm4innovation.

The Patent-Based Idea Generation task asks systems to turn real patents into product ideas viable within three years. We propose MK2, a prompt-centric pipeline: Gemini 2.5 drafts and iteratively edits a prompt, grafting useful fragments from weaker outputs; GPT-4.1 then uses this prompt to create one idea per patent, and an Elo loop judged by Qwen3-8B selects the best prompt-all without extra training data. Across three domains, two evaluator types, and six criteria, MK2 topped the automatic leaderboard and won 25 of 36 tests. Only the materials-chemistry track lagged, indicating the need for deeper domain grounding; yet, the results show that lightweight prompt engineering has already delivered competitive, commercially relevant ideation from patents.

Patents contain rich technical knowledge that can inspire innovative product ideas, yet accessing and interpreting this information remains a challenge. This work explores the use of Large Language Models (LLMs) and autonomous agents to mine and generate product concepts from a given patent. In this work, we design Agent Ideate, a framework for automatically generating product-based business ideas from patents. We experimented with open-source LLMs and agent-based architectures across three domains: Computer Science, Natural Language Processing, and Material Chemistry. Evaluation results show that the agentic approach consistently outperformed standalone LLMs in terms of idea quality, relevance, and novelty. These findings suggest that combining LLMs with agentic workflows can significantly enhance the innovation pipeline by unlocking the untapped potential of business idea generation from patent data.

Recently, large language models (LLMs) have shown promising abilities to generate novel research ideas in science, a direction which coincides with many foundational principles in computational creativity (CC). In light of these developments, we present an idea generation system named Spark that couples retrieval-augmented idea generation using LLMs with a reviewer model named Judge trained on 600K scientific reviews from OpenReview. Our work is both a system demonstration and intended to inspire other CC researchers to explore grounding the generation and evaluation of scientific ideas within foundational CC principles. To this end, we release the annotated dataset used to train Judge, inviting other researchers to explore the use of LLMs for idea generation and creative evaluations.

Writing about a subject enriches writers' understanding of that subject. This cognitive benefit of writing -- known as constructive learning -- is essential to how students learn in various disciplines. However, does this benefit persist when students write with generative AI writing assistants? Prior research suggests the answer varies based on the type of AI, e.g., auto-complete systems tend to hinder ideation, while assistants that pose Socratic questions facilitate it. This paper adds an additional perspective. Through a case study, we demonstrate that the impact of genAI on students' idea development depends not only on the AI but also on the students and, crucially, their interactions in between. Students who proactively explored ideas gained new ideas from writing, regardless of whether they used auto-complete or Socratic AI assistants. Those who engaged in prolonged, mindless copyediting developed few ideas even with a Socratic AI. These findings suggest opportunities in designing AI writing assistants, not merely by creating more thought-provoking AI, but also by fostering more thought-provoking writer-AI interactions.