Researcher runs experiments entirely with AI agents — adversarial checker agents say results hold
burny_tech · x · 2026-10-30
A researcher shares his experience running one experiment after another with AI agents: multiple experiments have produced positive results, and several adversarial fact-checking and scientific-rigor-checking agents all conclude the core findings actually hold.
But he remains wary:
- He worries the agents may be recursively reward hacking or collectively sloppy — years of prior low-quality output left him with "slop trauma"
- Even when results pass visual checks, he still inspects the data himself and runs his own fact-check and rigor tests
- The agents' writing is terrible and needs manual rewriting, though that's secondary as long as the result is legit
He finds it surreal that the number of research ideas is now limited only by token budget — ideally making ideas more concrete, more verifiable, and more hill-climbable.
More from coding & agent
- Master LLM evals step by step: read 100 traces by hand, then build a versioned golden dataset — datawithsuman · 2026-10-30
- Devs miss flow state with AI agents — faster loops from Cerebras may bring it back — vivekhaldar · 2026-10-30
- PixelRAG: pixel-native RAG with web screenshots hits 10.8k GitHub stars — adnan_hashmi · 2026-10-30
- Cognition benchmark: Gemini 4 Carbon scores 40% near-SOTA at $4.04 per task — scaling01 · 2026-10-30
- 1200 renders into a MiniMax H3 short film, dev open-sources ComfyUI take manager Picky — friedlc · 2026-10-30
- Team moved 60 agents off one shared API key: 4 lessons from the migration — No_Reindeer3079 · 2026-10-30