0

Are large language models superhuman chemists?

ChemBench, an automated evaluation framework, assesses the chemical reasoning of large language models against human experts, revealing their proficiency and shortcomings in specific tasks.

Year
2024
Venue
arXiv 2024
Authors
35
Hosting
Abstract onlyARXIV-DEFAULT

Cite

Notes

Only stored in your browser.

Attribution

Abstract & full text
arxiv.org/abs/2404.01475v2ARXIV-DEFAULT
TL;DR
Semantic Scholar
Attribution policy →

Abstract

Large language models (LLMs) have gained widespread interest due to their ability to process human language and perform tasks on which they have not been explicitly trained. However, we possess only a limited systematic understanding of the chemical capabilities of LLMs, which would be required to improve models and mitigate potential harm. Here, we introduce "ChemBench," an automated framework for evaluating the chemical knowledge and reasoning abilities of state-of-the-art LLMs against the expertise of chemists. We curated more than 2,700 question-answer pairs, evaluated leading open- and closed-source LLMs, and found that the best models outperformed the best human chemists in our study on average. However, the models struggle with some basic tasks and provide overconfident predictions. These findings reveal LLMs' impressive chemical capabilities while emphasizing the need for further research to improve their safety and usefulness. They also suggest adapting chemistry education and show the value of benchmarking frameworks for evaluating LLMs in specific domains.

Authors

35