Rethinking Scientific Discovery in the Agentic Era

Artificial intelligence has advanced scientific discovery, but most AI4Science systems remain fragmented tools that rely on humans to coordinate problem formulation, literature grounding, model use, simulation, validation, and knowledge reuse. This paper presents \textbf{SCION (Scientific Collaborative Innovation with Agentic Organizational Nexus)}, an agentic scientific operating system that acts as an \textbf{organizational nexus}. Through a Science Agent serving as a \textbf{Meta-Harness}, SCION connects scientific tasks, tools, agents, artifacts, and memory, transforming research into an executable, auditable, and reusable operational process. At its core is the \textbf{Research Execution Plan (REP)}, which compiles high-level scientific intent into staged objectives, dependencies, verification checkpoints, tool requirements, expected artifacts, and fallback conditions. SCION further integrates hierarchical multi-agent execution, profile-driven specialization, selective context construction, governed delegation, and layered epistemic memory to support long-horizon scientific work. We formulate discovery under SCION as \textbf{Target-conditioned Inverse Search} and extend it to hidden-target settings through batch active search under finite experimental budgets. Applications in materials analysis, molecule design, and protein or antibody screening, together with experiments on scientific reading, idea generation, molecule generation, and antibody screening, show that SCION outperforms existing autonomous research-agent baselines, especially in decomposition, verification, refinement, and memory reuse. Overall, SCION shifts AI from isolated tools toward a coordinated operational layer for traceable and reusable scientific innovation.

Rethinking Scientific Discovery in an Agentic Era

Artificial intelligence has advanced scientific discovery, but most AI4Science systems remain fragmented tools that rely on humans to coordinate problem formulation, literature grounding, model use, simulation, validation, and knowledge reuse. This paper presents \textbf{SCION (Scientific Collaborative Innovation with Agentic Organizational Nexus)}, an agentic scientific operating system that acts as an \textbf{organizational nexus}. Through a Science Agent serving as a \textbf{Meta-Harness}, SCION connects scientific tasks, tools, agents, artifacts, and memory, transforming research into an executable, auditable, and reusable operational process. At its core is the \textbf{Research Execution Plan (REP)}, which compiles high-level scientific intent into staged objectives, dependencies, verification checkpoints, tool requirements, expected artifacts, and fallback conditions. SCION further integrates hierarchical multi-agent execution, profile-driven specialization, selective context construction, governed delegation, and layered epistemic memory to support long-horizon scientific work. We formulate discovery under SCION as \textbf{Target-conditioned Inverse Search} and extend it to hidden-target settings through batch active search under finite experimental budgets. Applications in materials analysis, molecule design, and protein or antibody screening, together with experiments on scientific reading, idea generation, molecule generation, and antibody screening, show that SCION outperforms existing autonomous research-agent baselines, especially in decomposition, verification, refinement, and memory reuse. Overall, SCION shifts AI from isolated tools toward a coordinated operational layer for traceable and reusable scientific innovation.

Beyond Rating: A Comprehensive Evaluation and Benchmark for AI Reviews

The rapid adoption of Large Language Models (LLMs) has spurred interest in automated peer review; however, progress is currently stifled by benchmarks that treat reviewing primarily as a rating prediction task. We argue that the utility of a review lies in its textual justification--its arguments, questions, and critique--rather than a scalar score. To address this, we introduce Beyond Rating, a holistic evaluation framework that assesses AI reviewers across five dimensions: Content Faithfulness, Argumentative Alignment, Focus Consistency, Question Constructiveness, and AI-Likelihood. Notably, we propose a Max-Recall strategy to accommodate valid expert disagreement and introduce a curated dataset of paper with high-confidence reviews, rigorously filtered to remove procedural noise. Extensive experiments demonstrate that while traditional n-gram metrics fail to reflect human preferences, our proposed text-centric metrics--particularly the recall of weakness arguments--correlate strongly with rating accuracy. These findings establish that aligning AI critique focus with human experts is a prerequisite for reliable automated scoring, offering a robust standard for future research.