arXiv preprint ·
Embodied AI for Scientific Discovery: From Physical Action to Scientific Evidence
- Published
- Source
- arXiv preprint, posted before peer review
- Original
- Read it at arXiv
- Topics
Abstract
Scientific experiments are increasingly selected, executed and interpreted by learned systems that act through physical interfaces. Robot learning builds physical competence, whereas AI for science chooses which experiment to run, each reporting different endpoints. This review treats their interface as one problem, embodied AI for science, where the experiment itself is partially observed: specimen state, apparatus state and measurement processes are latent, actions are costly and irreversible, and missingness depends on execution and outcome. We organize the literature by three closures operating at distinct levels: operational closure (the experiment realized is the one intended), epistemic closure (the result updates beliefs or selects subsequent experiments) and evidential closure (the record supports a claim). We analyze workflows through a record-linked evidence cycle - Record, Diagnose, Calibrate, Confirm - as analytic functions with feedback. A taxonomy crosses these closures with six delegated decisions and five embodiment classes. Our formulation separates commanded, realized and observed conditions and models diagnosis with explicit resource, risk and sample-change costs. We compare experiment-selection methods by terminal decision, review perception, protocol compilation, visuomotor policies, world models, recovery and transfer by evidence emission requirements, and compare chemistry, materials, biology, microscopy and field workflows by what their records establish. An appendix provides an evidence map of 28 workflows (26 physical, two software-boundary), characterizing validation pathways and claim confirmation requirements. We propose evaluation that separates actions, valid experiments, campaigns and confirmed claims, framing open challenges as controlled comparisons with measurable failure conditions.
The authors’ abstract, as arXiv lists it. arXiv’s listings, abstracts included, are free for anyone to reuse.
Read it on ReadSearch
Each opens after you create an account, and brings you back to this paper.
More in Artificial Intelligence
Swapping the Judge Changes the Ranking: A Preregistered Study of Cross-Provider Replication in LLM-Judged System Comparisons
BobFlow: Towards Human-Agent Collaborative Data Science Using Dataflows
The Agent Board: Kanban for Machines; Durable Coordination for Agents That Outlive the Conversation
How Well Can Large Language Models Impersonate Individual Authors? A Comparative Evaluation
Structured Clinical Memory as Context for Probabilistic Decision Models: A Synthetic Evaluation with Jev
Get the few papers worth your time in Artificial Intelligence every morning.
ReadSearch reads the new papers in your field each day and brings you the few worth reading, each with its key finding in a sentence.