HN Explorer

Show HN: AI Agent System to Analyze ArXiv AI Papers (stack-ai.com)

21 points by sabrina_ramonov ↗ HN
Building a multi-agent system to analyze new AI research papers from 3 distinct perspectives:

- Deep learning researcher agent: extract interesting deep learning methods that are related to paper

- Theoretical mathematician agent: figure out theoretical mathematical concepts that are important in this paper and additional theoretical references that will be useful in understanding it

- Skeptic agent: find unjustified assumptions that lack supporting evidence

For this mvp, I used low-code agent platform StackAI (YC W23) and wrote about my process: https://www.sabrina.dev/p/building-ai-agent-system-to-analyz...

11 comments

[ 3.3 ms ] story [ 29.7 ms ] thread
__w1kke___
Next up - use Devin or similar agent to implement the code for an AI paper? And after that write a paper about it.
p1esk
That’s what I expect from gpt5.
EternalFury
So much is riding on GPT5, if it disappoints, it’s another AI winter.
p1esk
True. Altman said he *hopes* the quality improvement will be as much as 3.5 —-> 4.
meiraleal
Cheaper and faster gpt4 is enough to change the industry for the next 10 years
[deleted]
(comment deleted)
sitkack
I am on FF and only the first "Combined" text box gets updated. The other agent outputs are not rendered.
sabrina_ramonov
oh no, I may have run out of credits on my free stackai plan
szvsw
Edit: I should say that I think a much more applicable use-case for something like this is passing in N papers and asking for synthesis, or to eliminate N-1, select the most relevant to a query, etc etc. what I am reacting to below is just the idea of asking for a summary of a single paper.

-

Maybe this is an aloof response, but I guess I struggle to see how this ”tool” (putting that in quotes because it is just a DAG of prompts, which doesn’t quite rise to the level of ”tool” to me) actually helps someone as a researcher.

It seems like reading the title of a paper, the abstract and skimming the paper are such fundamental skills and not taking the small amount of time to do that yourself just makes you less effective as a researcher? I guess I can see the output of a graph like this being vaguely useful in terms of generating metadata for paper indexes and so on but piping the output to a human? Just seems like extra steps and not much time saved to me compared to reading with your own eyes.

Being able to process knowledge quickly will always be important, but I feel like this (or other similar summarization methods) would not actually help you do it quicker in a meaningful way, and in fact makes you slower at doing it on your own if you really come to solely rely on it.

Maybe I’m just being a boomer here (despite being about 30…)

sabrina_ramonov
I'm not a researcher and this is not meant for researchers. I have a tech background and I like to keep up with the latest research. But there's A LOT of papers coming out daily. To choose which papers to dive into, I want a tool to give me a glimpse of what DL/math methods each paper uses and see if there's any interesting combinations that would make me want to read further. To your point, my next step is to hook it up daily feed of X papers and analyze them all. This is just hacky v1. I don't love that it's DAG, but I'm experimenting with low code agent platforms and haven't found one that supports cycles.