Aviary: training language agents on challenging scientific tasks

Authors: Siddharth Narayanan, James D. Braza, Ryan-Rhys Griffiths, Manu Ponnapati, Albert Bou, Jon Laurent, Ori Kabeli, Geemi Wellawatte, Sam Cox, Samuel G. Rodriques, Andrew D. White

License: CC BY-SA 4.0

Results of the summarizing process for the arXiv paper: 2412.21154v1

  • Comprehensive Summary
  • Key points
  • Layman's Summary
  • Blog article
In the realm of solving complex real-world tasks in the field of science, a series of actions and observations are required. This process involves multiple cycles of analysis, tool utilization, and experimentation. Language agents have emerged as a promising solution for automating intellectual tasks in science due to their ability to interact with tools using natural language or code. However, the flexibility of these agents presents conceptual and practical challenges for software implementations. To address these challenges, has been introduced as an extensible gymnasium for language agents. Agents are formalized as policies that solve language-grounded partially observable Markov decision processes known as . Within Aviary, five environments have been implemented, with a focus on three challenging scientific tasks: manipulating DNA constructs for molecular cloning, answering research questions by accessing scientific literature, and engineering protein stability. These environments were carefully selected for their emphasis on multi-step reasoning and relevance to contemporary biology research. Through online training and scaling inference-time compute capabilities, it has been demonstrated that language agents supported by open-source LLMs can not only match but exceed both frontier LLM agents and human experts on multiple tasks at significantly lower inference costs - up to 100 times lower in some cases. Furthermore, Aviary has proven to be a valuable resource for developing language agents capable of tackling complex scientific tasks efficiently. The introduction of the has provided a formal structure for describing agent tasks and showcasing them as stochastic computation graphs. By leveraging behavior cloning, expert iteration, and inference-time sampling techniques with trained Llama-3.1-8B EI agents within Aviary's environments, impressive performance levels have been achieved that surpass human-level task performance while maintaining cost-effectiveness. The collaborative efforts at FutureHouse supported by Eric and Wendy Schmidt have played a crucial role in this advancement. Utilizing compute resources from the National AI Research Resource Pilot with support from NVIDIA has also been instrumental in driving progress in this area. The open-source nature of both Aviary and the LDP frameworks ensures accessibility for implementing environments and language agents across various domains. Overall, this work signifies a significant step towards high-throughput automation of meaningful scientific tasks within biology using efficient computational methods.
AI-generated keywords: Language agents Aviary Scientific tasks LDP framework High-throughput automation

AI-generated Key Points

  • Language agents are a promising solution for automating intellectual tasks in science due to their ability to interact with tools using natural language or code.
  • Aviary has been introduced as an extensible gymnasium for language agents, formalizing agents as policies that solve language-grounded partially observable Markov decision processes.
  • Aviary focuses on three challenging scientific tasks: manipulating DNA constructs for molecular cloning, answering research questions by accessing scientific literature, and engineering protein stability.
  • Language agents supported by open-source LLMs within Aviary can exceed both frontier LLM agents and human experts on multiple tasks at significantly lower inference costs.
  • Aviary has proven to be a valuable resource for developing language agents capable of tackling complex scientific tasks efficiently, achieving impressive performance levels surpassing human-level task performance while maintaining cost-effectiveness.
  • Collaborative efforts at FutureHouse supported by Eric and Wendy Schmidt, along with compute resources from the National AI Research Resource Pilot with support from NVIDIA, have been instrumental in driving progress in this area.
  • The open-source nature of both Aviary and the LDP frameworks ensures accessibility for implementing environments and language agents across various domains.
Also access our AI generated: Comprehensive summary, Lay summary, Blog-like article; or ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant.

Abstract: Solving complex real-world tasks requires cycles of actions and observations. This is particularly true in science, where tasks require many cycles of analysis, tool use, and experimentation. Language agents are promising for automating intellectual tasks in science because they can interact with tools via natural language or code. Yet their flexibility creates conceptual and practical challenges for software implementations, since agents may comprise non-standard components such as internal reasoning, planning, tool usage, as well as the inherent stochasticity of temperature-sampled language models. Here, we introduce Aviary, an extensible gymnasium for language agents. We formalize agents as policies solving language-grounded partially observable Markov decision processes, which we term language decision processes. We then implement five environments, including three challenging scientific environments: (1) manipulating DNA constructs for molecular cloning, (2) answering research questions by accessing scientific literature, and (3) engineering protein stability. These environments were selected for their focus on multi-step reasoning and their relevance to contemporary biology research. Finally, with online training and scaling inference-time compute, we show that language agents backed by open-source, non-frontier LLMs can match and exceed both frontier LLM agents and human experts on multiple tasks at up to 100x lower inference cost.

Submitted to arXiv on 30 Dec. 2024

Tools for this paper

Explain it differently 3 free rewrites left today
Export BibTeX · RIS (Zotero, Mendeley, EndNote) · Markdown (Notion, Obsidian) · Premium
Citation alerts Premium
Journal club Slides to present it Premium
For journalists Press kit and hype check Premium

Ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant

You can also chat with multiple papers at once here.

Figures and plots

Ask about a figure by number or use its question button to request visual analysis. Up to two figures and four image panels per question. Values read from plots are approximate; check the original data.

AI assistant instructions?

Assess the quality of the AI-generated content by voting

Score: 0

Why do we need votes?

Votes are used to determine whether we need to re-run our summarizing tools. If the count reaches -10, our tools can be restarted.

The previous summary was created more than a year ago and can be re-run (if necessary) by clicking on the Run button below.

Similar papers summarized with our AI tools

Navigate through even more similar papers through a

tree representation

Disclaimer: The AI-based summarization tool and virtual assistant provided on this website may not always provide accurate and complete summaries or responses. We encourage you to carefully review and evaluate the generated content to ensure its quality and relevance to your needs.