Nicolas Baldwin

Martin Josifoski, Lars Klein, Maxime Peyrard et al.

Recent advances in artificial intelligence (AI) have produced highly capable and controllable systems. This creates unprecedented opportunities for structured reasoning as well as collaboration among multiple AI systems and humans. To fully realize this potential, it is essential to develop a principled way of designing and studying such structured interactions. For this purpose, we introduce the conceptual framework Flows. Flows are self-contained building blocks of computation, with an isolated state, communicating through a standardized message-based interface. This modular design simplifies the process of creating Flows by allowing them to be recursively composed into arbitrarily nested interactions and is inherently concurrency-friendly. Crucially, any interaction can be implemented using this framework, including prior work on AI-AI and human-AI interactions, prompt engineering schemes, and tool augmentation. We demonstrate the potential of Flows on competitive coding, a challenging task on which even GPT-4 struggles. Our results suggest that structured reasoning and collaboration substantially improve generalization, with AI-only Flows adding +21 and human-AI Flows adding +54 absolute points in terms of solve rate. To support rapid and rigorous research, we introduce the aiFlows library embodying Flows. The aiFlows library is available at https://github.com/epfl-dlab/aiflows. Data and Flows for reproducing our experiments are available at https://github.com/epfl-dlab/cc_flows.

Alisia Lupidi, Bhavul Gauri, Thomas Simon Foster et al.

LLM agents hold significant promise for advancing scientific research. To accelerate this progress, we introduce AIRS-Bench (the AI Research Science Benchmark), a suite of 20 tasks sourced from state-of-the-art machine learning papers. These tasks span diverse domains, including language modeling, mathematics, bioinformatics, and time series forecasting. AIRS-Bench tasks assess agentic capabilities over the full research lifecycle -- including idea generation, experiment analysis and iterative refinement -- without providing baseline code. The AIRS-Bench task format is versatile, enabling easy integration of new tasks and rigorous comparison across different agentic frameworks. We establish baselines using frontier models paired with both sequential and parallel scaffolds. Our results show that agents exceed human SOTA in four tasks but fail to match it in sixteen others. Even when agents surpass human benchmarks, they do not reach the theoretical performance ceiling for the underlying tasks. These findings indicate that AIRS-Bench is far from saturated and offers substantial room for improvement. We open-source the AIRS-Bench task definitions and evaluation code to catalyze further development in autonomous scientific research.

Karen Hambardzumyan, Nicolas Baldwin, Edan Toledo et al.

Existing research has identified three structural performance bottlenecks in AI research agents: (1) synchronous single-GPU execution constrains sample throughput, limiting the benefit of search; (2) a generalization gap where validation-based selection causes performance to degrade over extended search horizons; and (3) the limited capability of fixed, single-turn LLM operators imposes a ceiling on search performance. We introduce AIRA$_2$, which addresses these bottlenecks through three architectural choices: an asynchronous multi-GPU worker pool that increases experiment throughput linearly; a Hidden Consistent Evaluation protocol that delivers a reliable evaluation signal; and ReAct agents that dynamically scope their actions and debug interactively. On MLE-bench-30, AIRA$_2$ achieves a mean Percentile Rank of 71.8% at 24 hours - surpassing the previous best of 69.9% - and steadily improves to 76.0% at 72 hours. Ablation studies reveal that each component is necessary and that the "overfitting" reported in prior work was driven by evaluation noise rather than true data memorization.

Ivan Zakazov, Alexander Sharipov, Berke Argin et al.

Motivated by the high costs of using black-box Large Language Models (LLMs), we introduce a novel prompt compression paradigm, under which we use smaller LLMs to compress inputs for the larger ones. We present the first comprehensive LLM-as-a-compressor benchmark spanning 25 open- and closed-source models, which reveals significant disparity in models' compression ability in terms of (i) preserving semantically important information (ii) following the user-provided compression rate (CR). We further improve the performance of gpt-4.1-mini, the best overall vanilla compressor, with Textgrad-based compression meta-prompt optimization. We also identify the most promising open-source vanilla LLM - Qwen3-4B - and post-train it with a combination of supervised fine-tuning (SFT) and Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO), pursuing the dual objective of CR adherence and maximizing the downstream task performance. We call the resulting model Cmprsr and demonstrate its superiority over both extractive and vanilla abstractive compression across the entire range of compression rates on lengthy inputs from MeetingBank and LongBench as well as short prompts from GSM8k. The latter highlights Cmprsr's generalizability across varying input lengths and domains. Moreover, Cmprsr closely follows the requested compression rate, offering fine control over the cost-quality trade-off.

Edan Toledo, Karen Hambardzumyan, Martin Josifoski et al. · meta-ai, oxford

AI research agents are demonstrating great potential to accelerate scientific progress by automating the design, implementation, and training of machine learning models. We focus on methods for improving agents' performance on MLE-bench, a challenging benchmark where agents compete in Kaggle competitions to solve real-world machine learning problems. We formalize AI research agents as search policies that navigate a space of candidate solutions, iteratively modifying them using operators. By designing and systematically varying different operator sets and search policies (Greedy, MCTS, Evolutionary), we show that their interplay is critical for achieving high performance. Our best pairing of search strategy and operator set achieves a state-of-the-art result on MLE-bench lite, increasing the success rate of achieving a Kaggle medal from 39.6% to 47.7%. Our investigation underscores the importance of jointly considering the search strategy, operator design, and evaluation methodology in advancing automated machine learning.

Oussama Gabouj, Kamel Charaf, Ivan Zakazov et al.

Large Language Models (LLMs) achieve strong performance across diverse tasks, but their effectiveness often depends on the quality of the provided context. Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) enriches prompts with external information, but its reliance on static databases constrains adaptability and can result in irrelevant demonstrations. In this work, we propose a Generative Retrieval-Aligned Demonstrator (GRAD), a dynamic demonstration-based approach where an LLM model is trained to generate input-specific concise demonstrations. By tailoring demonstrations to each input, our method offers better contextual support than traditional RAG approaches. We demonstrate the superiority of GRAD under budget constraints, where we limit both the number of tokens used per demonstration and the number of tokens used for the final output. Trained solely on a math dataset, GRAD consistently outperforms strong baselines on Qwen2.5-14B across mathematical reasoning and advanced STEM questions, highlighting GRAD's robust generalization to out-of-distribution (OOD) domains such as physics, chemistry, and computer science. Furthermore, we show that demonstrations generated by trained smaller models can effectively guide larger target models, reducing training costs while maintaining competitive accuracy. Overall, this work introduces a scalable demonstration generator model presenting the first step toward a dynamic few-shot learning paradigm in resource-constrained settings. We release the code used for the project.

Dimitrios Rontogiannis, Maxime Peyrard, Nicolas Baldwin et al.

Standard single-turn, static benchmarks fall short in evaluating the nuanced capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs) on complex tasks such as software engineering. In this work, we propose a novel interactive evaluation framework that assesses LLMs on multi-requirement programming tasks through structured, feedback-driven dialogue. Each task is modeled as a requirement dependency graph, and an ``interviewer'' LLM, aware of the ground-truth solution, provides minimal, targeted hints to an ``interviewee'' model to help correct errors and fulfill target constraints. This dynamic protocol enables fine-grained diagnostic insights into model behavior, uncovering strengths and systematic weaknesses that static benchmarks fail to measure. We build on DevAI, a benchmark of 55 curated programming tasks, by adding ground-truth solutions and evaluating the relevance and utility of interviewer hints through expert annotation. Our results highlight the importance of dynamic evaluation in advancing the development of collaborative code-generating agents.