Kai Tian

Biqing Qi, Kaiyan Zhang, Haoxiang Li et al.

Significant scientific discoveries have driven the progress of human civilisation. The explosion of scientific literature and data has created information barriers across disciplines that have slowed the pace of scientific discovery. Large Language Models (LLMs) hold a wealth of global and interdisciplinary knowledge that promises to break down these information barriers and foster a new wave of scientific discovery. However, the potential of LLMs for scientific discovery has not been formally explored. In this paper, we start from investigating whether LLMs can propose scientific hypotheses. To this end, we construct a dataset consist of background knowledge and hypothesis pairs from biomedical literature. The dataset is divided into training, seen, and unseen test sets based on the publication date to control visibility. We subsequently evaluate the hypothesis generation capabilities of various top-tier instructed models in zero-shot, few-shot, and fine-tuning settings, including both closed and open-source LLMs. Additionally, we introduce an LLM-based multi-agent cooperative framework with different role designs and external tools to enhance the capabilities related to generating hypotheses. We also design four metrics through a comprehensive review to evaluate the generated hypotheses for both ChatGPT-based and human evaluations. Through experiments and analyses, we arrive at the following findings: 1) LLMs surprisingly generate untrained yet validated hypotheses from testing literature. 2) Increasing uncertainty facilitates candidate generation, potentially enhancing zero-shot hypothesis generation capabilities. These findings strongly support the potential of LLMs as catalysts for new scientific discoveries and guide further exploration.

Hanbin Wang, Xiaoxuan Zhou, Zhipeng Xu et al.

This paper introduces Code-Vision, a benchmark designed to evaluate the logical understanding and code generation capabilities of Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs). It challenges MLLMs to generate a correct program that fulfills specific functionality requirements based on a given flowchart, which visually represents the desired algorithm or process. Code-Vision comprises three subsets: HumanEval-V, Algorithm, and MATH, which evaluate MLLMs' coding abilities across basic programming, algorithmic, and mathematical problem-solving domains. Our experiments evaluate 12 MLLMs on Code-Vision. Experimental results demonstrate that there is a large performance difference between proprietary and open-source models. On Hard problems, GPT-4o can achieve 79.3% pass@1, but the best open-source model only achieves 15%. Further experiments reveal that Code-Vision can pose unique challenges compared to other multimodal reasoning benchmarks MMCode and MathVista. We also explore the reason for the poor performance of the open-source models. All data and codes are available at https://github.com/wanghanbinpanda/CodeVision.