Reinforcement learning for user-centric agents is limited by the cost, latency, and risk of collecting online feedback, as well as by the lack of counterfactual comparisons under the same user state. In this paper, we propose World Model-Guided Reinforcement Learning via counterfactual user engagement simulation (WMG-RL), a framework in which a frozen user simulator provides reward supervision before real user exposure. Motivated by language world models, we instantiate the simulator as a User Engagement World Model (UEWM), which treats a recommended item as the agent action and the user's heterogeneous feedback as the environment observation. Rather than learning one fixed environment transition, UEWM learns to infer user-specific dynamics from engagement history and apply them to candidate items. In WMG-RL, a downstream policy proposes multiple candidate items for the same history; UEWM predicts the corresponding engagement feedback in parallel; and the simulated feedback is converted into dense rewards for policy optimization. Experiments show that UEWM provides reliable and transferable reward signals across domains, and that WMG-RL enables a compact 1.7B student policy to match or surpass much larger LLMs on downstream recommendation tasks.
Scientific equation discovery has long been central to scientific progress, proceeding through iterative cycles of hypothesis generation, observational testing, and refinement under scientific constraints. As LLM capabilities advance and their role in AI for Science expands, it remains an open problem whether they can genuinely discover scientific laws and how this ability should be evaluated. Existing evaluations, however, often either simplify discovery through synthetic settings or reuse published targets that may already be familiar to LLMs. We therefore introduce SCILAWS-BENCH, a benchmark for scientific law discovery built from published research and real scientific data. It comprises 118 problems drawn from 381 scientific papers, covering 291 candidate laws and roughly 8M real data points across six scientific disciplines. Each problem is instantiated in two complementary settings: (1) SCILAWS-REAL asks models to propose laws from fixed real observations and evaluates held-out predictive fit and scientific validity derived from the source literature, and (2) SCILAWS-PARALLEL asks models to actively query residual-calibrated worlds and recover synthesized hidden laws derived from published forms. This two-setting task design preserves each problem's scientific context while separately evaluating fixed-record law discovery and active recovery of a newly synthesized hidden law. We find that predictive fit can diverge from scientific validity, memorization shapes whether models reproduce or move beyond published formulas, and our best-of-N study reveals a selection bottleneck. Our work provides a paper-grounded benchmark and new empirical perspectives for evaluating AI for scientific discovery. Project page: https://yiyihum.github.io/SciLaws-Bench
Yi-Ming Huang, Zi-Chen Liu, Zhuo-Hang Wu et al.· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.
