CORTEXA
← Browse
arxivcs.AI2026-07-24

IDEAgent: Agentic Quality-Diversity Search for Research Idea Generation

Varun Gumma, Navonil Majumder, Soumitra Sinhahajari, Soujanya Poria

Large Language Models (LLMs) have significantly automated the process of scientific discovery over the past few years. However, existing systems share one core limitation: they generate and optimize ideas independently for either Quality or Diversity. This often leads to the generation of ideas in close proximity to one another or to a large set of trivial, unsound, or unclear concepts. In this work, we instead argue that research ideation should be treated as a conjunction of both objectives and framed as a Quality-Diversity (QD) search. In line with this perspective, we introduce IDEAgent, a multi-agent framework that manages the evolution of ideas through lineages. We jointly drive Quality using multi-objective feedback for dedicated repair and refinement, while Diversity is achieved through lightweight sequential memory and explicit comparison against completed ideas, their historical ancestors, and rejected proposals. To systematically evaluate this QD conjunction, we develop Yield, a joint metric that computes the largest set of mutually diverse ideas that satisfy a predetermined quality threshold. Finally, through evaluations across 32 topics spanning 8 domains of Computer Science, we show that IDEAgent outperforms the best baseline by 3.89x on Yield, while achieving non-zero Yield on 8x more topics. We further corroborate these findings through an analysis of quality improvements, showing that repair and refinement are crucial for building logical rigor and clarity while preserving non-obviousness. To encourage future research on QD-search-based ideation, we open-source IDEAgent at https://github.com/declare-lab/IDEAgent.

View free PDFSource page

Related papers

arxivcs.AI2026-07-23

AREX: Towards a Recursively Self-Improving Agent for Deep Research

Shuqi Lu, Chaofan Li, Kun Luo, Zhang Zhang, Hui Wang, Hongwang Xiao, et al.

Deep research requires agents to find answers that jointly satisfy multiple constraints. Discovering such answers is costly, whereas verifying a candidate can often be decomposed into tractable constraint-wise checks. This discovery--verification asymmetry suggests that a researc…

View free PDFSource page
arxivcs.AI2026-07-31

Self-Play Meets Skill Evolution: Self-Evolving Search Agents that Pose, Solve, and Remember

Zenghuang Fu, Zhaoyang Li, Qiuyuan Ai, Haoyu Wu, Minghui Wu, Chenxu Zhao, et al.

Self-play agents can generate training problems without questions from target benchmarks, but their curricula lack persistent state: failures affect gradients yet do not explicitly shape future practice. External skill memories preserve procedural experience but are typically lea…

View free PDFSource page
arxivcs.CVcs.AIcs.LGeess.IV2026-07-23

Synthetic data generation framework for quality control automation in gravure printing

Korota Arsène Coulibaly, Mohamed Hamlich, Khalid Hmali, Andrea Trombin

Quality control in printing, particularly in rotogravure printing, still depends on slow, costly, and subjective manual inspection. Automated surface defect detection is critical for maintaining high-quality standards in rotogravure printing. Deep learning models give prospects f…

View free PDFSource page
arxivcs.SEcs.AI2026-07-24

MineValiCoder: Reliable Code Generation with Test Case Quality Mining and Bipartite Graph-Based Mutual Validation

Zhen Zhao, Qihang Yang, Feifei Dai, Xiangfang Li, Bo Li

Large Language Model (LLM)-based Test-Driven Development (TDD) has advanced automated code generation. However, existing approaches depend heavily on human-crafted test cases and cannot operate effectively when only natural-language requirements are available. Although recent wor…

View free PDFSource page
arxivstat.MLcs.AIcs.LGecon.EM2026-07-24

CausalForge: A Formally Grounded, Self-Improving Agentic Framework for Automated Research in Causal Inference

Jiyuan Tan, Vasilis Syrgkanis

Automating theoretical research is constrained not only by the generation of candidate results, but also by their reliable evaluation. A common approach is to close the research loop with a large language model (LLM) reviewer. However, such reviewers remain empirically unreliable…

View free PDFSource page