๊ฐ€์ž… ํ›„ ์ดˆ๋Œ€ ๋งํฌ๋ฅผ ๊ณต์œ ํ•˜๋ฉด ๋™์˜์ƒ ์žฌ์ƒ ๋ฐ ์ดˆ๋Œ€ ๋ณด์ƒ์„ ๋ฐ›์„ ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ์Šต๋‹ˆ๋‹ค.

cv usk
@cv_usk
AI / Software Research Notes AI Agent, LLMOps, MLOps, Software Architecture ๆŠ•็จฟใฏๅ€‹ไบบใฎๆ„่ฆ‹ใงใ™ใ€‚
๊ฐ€์ž… May 2026
282 ํŒ”๋กœ์ž‰ ์ค‘    430 ํŒฌ
Letting AI write code and run experiments is old news by now. But what happens when you hand it the whole research process, from picking a topic to writing the paper? Earlier "AI scientist" systems tended to stay stuck as glorified hyperparameter search engines, chasing short-term optimization with little room for genuine imagination. ๐Ÿ”ฌ A new paper from Sakana AI, "The Agentic Scientist: Orchestrating Coding Agents for Automated Scientific (Co-)Discovery," proposes an orchestration layer that unifies task setup, parallel investigation, retrospective evidence generation, and grounded paper writing. Multiple agents share a memory and run research cycles in parallel, splitting hypothesis proposal from implementation and verification. ๐Ÿ† A paper it actually wrote, on an extended error-diffusion learning rule, passed external peer review and was accepted as a talk at ALIFE 2026. Across a broader evaluation spanning 5 ML tasks, 4 coding harnesses, and 70 research campaigns, final experiment scores correlated with paper review scores at r=0.44. The system also discovered real algorithmic improvements on its own, like lifting retrieval accuracy from 51.7% to 98.0% by fixing LoRA routing. It's a concrete look at what research looks like once AI owns the process all the way through to the paper. URL: #AIScientist# #AutomatedDiscovery#
๋” ๋ณด๊ธฐ