MEGA Hub

Bringing analytic rigor to agentic AI for science: The Brain Researcher platform for neuroimaging data analysis

Authors

Do you know Zijiao Chen?You can claim authorship or link another user.Do you know Nicholas Lu?You can claim authorship or link another user.Do you know Xinhui Li?You can claim authorship or link another user.Do you know Jocelyn A. Ricard?You can claim authorship or link another user.Do you know Ce Ju?You can claim authorship or link another user.Do you know Huan H. Wang?You can claim authorship or link another user.Do you know Christian Kindermann?You can claim authorship or link another user.Do you know Jeanette A. Mumford?You can claim authorship or link another user.Do you know Steven Dillmann?You can claim authorship or link another user.Do you know James Kent?You can claim authorship or link another user.Do you know Alejandro de la Vega?You can claim authorship or link another user.Do you know Sanmi Koyejo?You can claim authorship or link another user.Do you know Vince D. Calhoun?You can claim authorship or link another user.Do you know Joshua W. Buckholtz?You can claim authorship or link another user.Do you know Juan Helen Zhou?You can claim authorship or link another user.Do you know Steffen Bollmann?You can claim authorship or link another user.Do you know Russell A. Poldrack?You can claim authorship or link another user.

Abstract

AI agents can execute scientific analyses, but an analytic output becomes a defensible claim only after alternatives are weighed and the claim is limited to what the evidence supports. Agents may reproduce failures including selective analysis, premature declarations of success and optimization of imperfect criteria. We present Brain Researcher, an agentic research harness operating in a neuroimaging researcher's computational environment under rules for admissible analyses, required checks and claim scope. In benchmarks, Brain Researcher increased first-choice tool-selection accuracy across seven models by 70.2 percentage points (23.3% without it versus 93.6% with it) and verifiable grounding from 4.6% to 22.0%. In collaborator-led and self-evolving studies, multiverse analyses exposed analytic-choice sensitivity, and scientific review classified claims as accepted, qualified, revised, blocked, rejected or deferred. By linking decisions to evidence and provenance, Brain Researcher embeds methodological judgment within the workflow, not after it.

Community

00

Publication notes

Author note
103 pages, 19 figures; Supplementary Information included