Autonomous agents powered by large language models (LLMs) promise to accelerate scientific discovery end-to-end, but rigorously evaluating their capacity for verifiable discovery remains a central challenge. Existing benchmarks face a trade-off: they either heavily rely on LLM-as-judge evaluations of automatically generated research outputs or optimize convenient yet isolated performance metrics that provide coarse proxies for scientific insight. To address this gap, we introduce FIRE-Bench (Full-cycle Insight Rediscovery Evaluation), a benchmark that evaluates agents through the rediscovery of established findings from recent, high-impact machine learning research. Agents are given only a high-level research question extracted from a published, verified study and must autonomously explore ideas, design experiments, implement code, execute their plans, and derive conclusions supported by empirical evidence. We evaluate a range of state-of-the-art agents with frontier LLMs backbones like gpt-5 on FIRE-Bench. Our results show that full-cycle scientific research remains challenging for current agent systems: even the strongest agents achieve limited rediscovery success (<50 F1), exhibit high variance across runs, and display recurring failure modes in experimental design, execution, and evidence-based reasoning. FIRE-Bench provides a rigorous and diagnostic framework for measuring progress toward reliable agent-driven scientific discovery.
FIRE-Bench: Evaluating Agents on the Rediscovery of Scientific Insights
Researchers developed FIRE-Bench, a comprehensive evaluation framework that challenges autonomous agents to rediscover established scientific findings through complete research cycles involving hypothesis generation, experimentation, coding, and evidence-based conclusion drawing.
- Year
- 2026
- Venue
- arXiv 2026
- Authors
- 12
- Hosting
- Abstract onlyARXIV-DEFAULT
Cite
Notes
Only stored in your browser.
Attribution
- Abstract & full text
- arxiv.org/abs/2602.02905ARXIV-DEFAULT
- TL;DR
- Semantic Scholar