On the Limits of LLM-as-Judge for Scientific Novelty Assessment

LLMs are increasingly used to generate and judge scientific ideas. This makes novelty evaluation a central problem. Full idea evaluation is difficult because it often requires judging a method, its feasibility, and its empirical promise. We therefore study a cleaner upstream object: the research question (RQ). RQ generation is a prerequisite for scientific ideation, and RQs can be compared against questions pursued in real papers. We introduce RQ-Bench, a benchmark built from recent arXiv papers. For each paper, we reconstruct author-anchored RQs from its cited background, gaps, and contributions. These RQs are not the only valid questions for the same background. They are author-anchored reference points for testing novelty judgments. We evaluate model-generated RQs with standalone LLM judging, comparative LLM judging, and human expert evaluation. LLM judges consistently rate model-generated RQs as highly novel, producing a novelty mirage; in comparative evaluations, this preference becomes even stronger. Domain experts, however, reach the opposite conclusion and prefer the author-anchored reference questions. We further find that many generated RQs are narrow or source-bound, a dimension that LLM judges often miss unless explicitly tested. Overall, the contradictory novelty evaluations between LLM judges and human experts raise a serious concern about the reliability of using LLMs to assess the scientific novelty of research questions.

Policy Gradient Methods for Non-Markovian Reinforcement Learning

We study policy gradient methods for reinforcement learning in non-Markovian decision processes (NMDPs), where observations and rewards depend on the entire interaction history. To handle this dependence, the agent maintains an internal state that is recursively updated to provide a compact summary of past observations and actions. In contrast to approaches that treat the agent state dynamics as fixed or learn it via predictive objectives, we propose a reward-centric formulation that jointly optimizes the agent state dynamics and the control policy to maximize the expected cumulative reward. To this end, we consider a class of Agent State-Markov (ASM) policies, comprising an agent state dynamics and a control policy that maps the agent state to actions. We establish a novel policy gradient theorem for ASM policies, extending the classical policy gradient results from the Markovian setting to episodic and infinite-horizon discounted NMDPs. Building on this gradient expression, we propose the Agent State-Markov Policy Gradient (ASMPG) algorithm, which leverages the recursive structure of the agent state dynamics for efficient optimization. We establish finite-time and almost sure convergence guarantees, and empirically demonstrate that, on a range of non-Markovian tasks, ASMPG outperforms baselines that learn state representations via predictive objectives.