arXiv:2611.12933v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Closed-loop autonomous experimentation can accelerate scientific discovery, but implementation effort limits accessibility. Agentic systems may lower this barrier, although sustained operation on physical instruments remains largely unexplored. Here, using coding-agent infrastructure grounded in validated scientific methods, we demonstrate autonomous synchrotron X-ray experiments on nanoparticle superlattices under evolving, human-defined objectives. Complete human-agent and agent-agent transcripts enable an audit that reconstructs decision provenance and characterizes the division of cognitive labor. Across three experiments, 61-67% of messages involved interpretation or judgment, while the share of methodological and scientific contributions increased from 46% in the setup-focused first experiment to 56-61% in later experiments. Provenance showed that 59-68% of error corrections involved multiple participants and that about half of all decisions incorporated the input of another participant. These results may guide design principles for multi-agent scientific systems and inform future agent harnesses, model training, and accessible autonomous experimentation.
Abstract: Closed-loop autonomous experimentation can accelerate scientific discovery, but implementation effort limits accessibility. Agentic systems may lower this barrier, although sustained operation on physical instruments remains largely unexplored. Here, using coding-agent infrastructure grounded in validated scientific methods, we demonstrate autonomous synchrotron X-ray experiments on nanoparticle superlattices under evolving, human-defined objectives. Complete human-agent and agent-agent transcripts enable an audit that reconstructs decision provenance and characterizes the division of cognitive labor. Across three experiments, 61-67% of messages involved interpretation or judgment, while the share of methodological and scientific contributions increased from 46% in the setup-focused first experiment to 56-61% in later experiments. Provenance showed that 59-68% of error corrections involved multiple participants and that about half of all decisions incorporated the input of another participant. These results may guide design principles for multi-agent scientific systems and inform future agent harnesses, model training, and accessible autonomous experimentation.
This article has been indexed from cs.AI updates on arXiv.org