0
The Ideation-Execution Gap: Execution Outcomes of LLM-Generated versus Human Research Ideas
Chenglei Si, Tatsunori Hashimoto, Diyi Yang, 2025. arXiv.
A follow-up to the 2024 study in which researchers carried out LLM-generated and human research ideas, and the outcomes were compared with how the ideas had been rated beforehand.
What it's used for here
The inquiry-framework survey cites it as the reason candidate hypotheses are ranked only after a cheap test.
Cited by on this site 1 record
1 methods surveys
SRCFrameworks of inquiry
Cite it
Si, C., Hashimoto, T., & Yang, D. (2025). The Ideation-Execution Gap: Execution Outcomes of LLM-Generated versus Human Research Ideas. arXiv. https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.20803
@article{si2025ideation,
author = {Si, Chenglei and Hashimoto, Tatsunori and Yang, Diyi},
title = {The Ideation-Execution Gap: Execution Outcomes of LLM-Generated versus Human Research Ideas},
journal = {arXiv},
year = {2025},
url = {https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.20803}
}TY - GEN TI - The Ideation-Execution Gap: Execution Outcomes of LLM-Generated versus Human Research Ideas AU - Si, Chenglei AU - Hashimoto, Tatsunori AU - Yang, Diyi PY - 2025 JO - arXiv UR - https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.20803 ER -
Si, Chenglei et al.. “The Ideation-Execution Gap: Execution Outcomes of LLM-Generated versus Human Research Ideas.” arXiv (2025).