Lawrence Hunter

Hector Zenil, Jesper Tegnér, Felipe S. Abrahão et al. · cambridge

Recent advances in machine learning and AI, including Generative AI and LLMs, are disrupting technological innovation, product development, and society as a whole. AI's contribution to technology can come from multiple approaches that require access to large training data sets and clear performance evaluation criteria, ranging from pattern recognition and classification to generative models. Yet, AI has contributed less to fundamental science in part because large data sets of high-quality data for scientific practice and model discovery are more difficult to access. Generative AI, in general, and Large Language Models in particular, may represent an opportunity to augment and accelerate the scientific discovery of fundamental deep science with quantitative models. Here we explore and investigate aspects of an AI-driven, automated, closed-loop approach to scientific discovery, including self-driven hypothesis generation and open-ended autonomous exploration of the hypothesis space. Integrating AI-driven automation into the practice of science would mitigate current problems, including the replication of findings, systematic production of data, and ultimately democratisation of the scientific process. Realising these possibilities requires a vision for augmented AI coupled with a diversity of AI approaches able to deal with fundamental aspects of causality analysis and model discovery while enabling unbiased search across the space of putative explanations. These advances hold the promise to unleash AI's potential for searching and discovering the fundamental structure of our world beyond what human scientists have been able to achieve. Such a vision would push the boundaries of new fundamental science rather than automatize current workflows and instead open doors for technological innovation to tackle some of the greatest challenges facing humanity today.

Darya Shlyk, Stefano Montanelli, Lawrence Hunter

Despite recent progress, Biomedical Entity Linking (BEL) with large language models (LLMs) remains computationally inefficient and challenging to deploy in practical settings. In this work, we demonstrate that instruction-tuning of open-source generative models can offer an effective solution when applied at the re-ranking stage of the BEL pipeline. We propose a set-wise instruction-tuning formulation that enables fast and accurate candidate selection. Our method demonstrates strong performance on multiple BEL benchmarks, yielding significant improvements in linking accuracy (3%-24%) while reducing inference time compared to the state-of-the-art. We integrate our generative re-ranker into BeLink, a modular, end-to-end system designed for practical real-world BEL applications.

Sagi Shaier, Lawrence Hunter, Katharina Kann

Many dialogue systems (DSs) lack characteristics humans have, such as emotion perception, factuality, and informativeness. Enhancing DSs with knowledge alleviates this problem, but, as many ways of doing so exist, keeping track of all proposed methods is difficult. Here, we present the first survey of knowledge-enhanced DSs. We define three categories of systems - internal, external, and hybrid - based on the knowledge they use. We survey the motivation for enhancing DSs with knowledge, used datasets, and methods for knowledge search, knowledge encoding, and knowledge incorporation. Finally, we propose how to improve existing systems based on theories from linguistics and cognitive science.

Sagi Shaier, Kevin Bennett, Lawrence Hunter et al.

State-of-the-art question answering (QA) models exhibit a variety of social biases (e.g., with respect to sex or race), generally explained by similar issues in their training data. However, what has been overlooked so far is that in the critical domain of biomedicine, any unjustified change in model output due to patient demographics is problematic: it results in the unfair treatment of patients. Selecting only questions on biomedical topics whose answers do not depend on ethnicity, sex, or sexual orientation, we ask the following research questions: (RQ1) Do the answers of QA models change when being provided with irrelevant demographic information? (RQ2) Does the answer of RQ1 differ between knowledge graph (KG)-grounded and text-based QA systems? We find that irrelevant demographic information change up to 15% of the answers of a KG-grounded system and up to 23% of the answers of a text-based system, including changes that affect accuracy. We conclude that unjustified answer changes caused by patient demographics are a frequent phenomenon, which raises fairness concerns and should be paid more attention to.

Nourah M Salem, Elizabeth White, Michael Bada et al.

Coreference resolution in biomedical texts presents unique challenges due to complex domain-specific terminology, high ambiguity in mention forms, and long-distance dependencies between coreferring expressions. In this work, we present a comprehensive evaluation of generative large language models (LLMs) for coreference resolution in the biomedical domain. Using the CRAFT corpus as our benchmark, we assess the LLMs' performance with four prompting experiments that vary in their use of local, contextual enrichment, and domain-specific cues such as abbreviations and entity dictionaries. We benchmark these approaches against a discriminative span-based encoder, SpanBERT, to compare the efficacy of generative versus discriminative methods. Our results demonstrate that while LLMs exhibit strong surface-level coreference capabilities, especially when supplemented with domain-grounding prompts, their performance remains sensitive to long-range context and mentions ambiguity. Notably, the LLaMA 8B and 17B models show superior precision and F1 scores under entity-augmented prompting, highlighting the potential of lightweight prompt engineering for enhancing LLM utility in biomedical NLP tasks.

Nourah M Salem, Elizabeth White, Michael Bada et al.

Scientific progress is driven by the deliberate articulation of what remains unknown. This study investigates the ability of large language models (LLMs) to identify research knowledge gaps in the biomedical literature. We define two categories of knowledge gaps: explicit gaps, clear declarations of missing knowledge; and implicit gaps, context-inferred missing knowledge. While prior work has focused mainly on explicit gap detection, we extend this line of research by addressing the novel task of inferring implicit gaps. We conducted two experiments on almost 1500 documents across four datasets, including a manually annotated corpus of biomedical articles. We benchmarked both closed-weight models (from OpenAI) and open-weight models (Llama and Gemma 2) under paragraph-level and full-paper settings. To address the reasoning of implicit gaps inference, we introduce \textbf{\small TABI}, a Toulmin-Abductive Bucketed Inference scheme that structures reasoning and buckets inferred conclusion candidates for validation. Our results highlight the robust capability of LLMs in identifying both explicit and implicit knowledge gaps. This is true for both open- and closed-weight models, with larger variants often performing better. This suggests a strong ability of LLMs for systematically identifying candidate knowledge gaps, which can support early-stage research formulation, policymakers, and funding decisions. We also report observed failure modes and outline directions for robust deployment, including domain adaptation, human-in-the-loop verification, and benchmarking across open- and closed-weight models.