跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail
← 研踪 PaperTrail

arXiv:2611.13994 · v1

BioXArena-Pro: a research-grade benchmark for autonomous biomedical machine learning agents

首次提交 2026-11-10 20:39
版本更新 2026-11-10 20:39
雷达观测 2026-11-11 11:04
arXiv ↗PDF ↗

摘要

Coding agents are increasingly proposed as autonomous builders of biomedical models, but existing benchmarks are small, near saturation or open to leaked information. We present BioXArena-Pro, 64 research-level modelling tasks from eight biomedical domains, each rebuilt from a published study; most hold out whole biological units such as species or cohorts. Across 22 agent configurations, the best scores 55.1 of 100, and the scaffold matters almost as much as the model. We re-ran a published method for every task: where the published recipe applies unchanged, the best agent and the methods tie; on rebuilt tasks the methods trail by 8.2 points, suggesting that agents gain by adapting to new data. Pretrained models (including biological foundation models) matter where the strongest agent uses them: forbidding them decreases its score on those tasks by 9 points. Every task was audited in several AI-assisted rounds and a final human review.

作者备注:51 pages (22 main text, 29 supplementary information), 5 figures, 7 supplementary tables. Code: https://github.com/mbzuai-ai4bio/BioXArena-Pro ; Data: https://huggingface.co/datasets/mbzuai-ai4bio/BioXArena-Pro-Public ; Leaderboard: https://mbzuai-ai4bio.github.io/BioXArena-Pro/

AI 论文解读

基于摘要 · 非全文审阅

此版本尚未生成 AI 解读。解读由后台任务生成并按论文版本保存,登录后共享已有结果。

版本差异

目前只观测到一个版本,无法比较变化。之后收录新版本时,会在这里对照标题、作者、分类和摘要。

观测到的版本

相邻记录可能跳过中间版本;首次发现 v2 及以上也会标为版本更新。

v1 · 2026-11-10 20:39 · 最新观测版本

BioXArena-Pro: a research-grade benchmark for autonomous biomedical machine learning agents

Coding agents are increasingly proposed as autonomous builders of biomedical models, but existing benchmarks are small, near saturation or open to leaked information. We present BioXArena-Pro, 64 research-level modelling tasks from eight biomedical domains, each rebuilt from a published study; most hold out whole biological units such as species or cohorts. Across 22 agent configurations, the best scores 55.1 of 100, and the scaffold matters almost as much as the model. We re-ran a published method for every task: where the published recipe applies unchanged, the best agent and the methods tie; on rebuilt tasks the methods trail by 8.2 points, suggesting that agents gain by adapting to new data. Pretrained models (including biological foundation models) matter where the strongest agent uses them: forbidding them decreases its score on those tasks by 9 points. Every task was audited in several AI-assisted rounds and a final human review.

查看此版本解读 →查看此版本原文 ↗