[Submitted on 9 Jul 2026]
[View PDF](https://arxiv.org/pdf/2609.15996)
[HTML (experimental)](https://arxiv.org/html/2609.15996v1)
Abstract:Chen, Zhao, and Cohan introduce a valuable distributional evaluation of LLM-generated research ideas. This comment raises a narrower identification concern: their human baseline consists of published papers, whereas the LLM baseline consists of one-shot proposals. If bridge-like or synthesis-like ideas are relatively easy to generate but relatively unlikely to survive publication, then the published human baseline will understate their prevalence in the unseen human idea pool. The observed human--LLM gap may therefore be partly, or even largely, a consequence of survivorship bias.
References & Citations
...
Bibliographic Explorer
(What is the Explorer?) Connected Papers
(What is Connected Papers?) Litmaps
(What is Litmaps?) scite Smart Citations
(What are Smart Citations?) alphaXiv
(What is alphaXiv?) CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers
(What is CatalyzeX?) DagsHub
(What is DagsHub?) Gotit.pub
(What is GotitPub?) Hugging Face
(What is Huggingface?) ScienceCast
(What is ScienceCast?) Influence Flower
(What are Influence Flowers?) CORE Recommender
(What is CORE?) arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.