ArticleFrontiers in big data2026
Differentiated memory and scientific cognition in AI research agents.
Article in Frontiers in big data, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
AI research agents increasingly support ideation, literature search, coding, experimental execution, analysis, and manuscript drafting across the scientific workflow. This progress advances automated discovery, but workflow automation is not scientific cognition. Scientific reasoning is cumulative and path-dependent: it depends on what a researcher has written, read, learned from critique, absorbed through experience, and used as habitual standards for judging novelty, rigor, feasibility, and significance. We propose Mnemo as a framework for modeling scientific cognition in AI research agents. First, scientific cognition may require differentiated memory, organized into distinct spaces for authored work, external reference, critique, experience, and judgment. Second, provenance should be treated not as passive metadata but as memory routing, because source origin helps determine cognitive function in reasoning. Third, new ideas may be better modeled as controlled collisions across memory spaces, filtered by judgment, rejection, and epistemic calibration, than as generic recombination from model priors. Mnemo motivates a research agenda for AI in science centered on routing fidelity, critique use, judgment alignment, rejection quality, and epistemic calibration.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.