Experiment efficiency

Area: definition. Apply the shared measurement protocol.

Estimated progress toward AI-managed physics

25% complete — judgment-based estimate as of November 7, 2026. Confidence: low. The scale starts at 0% before ChatGPT's public release in 2022 and ends at 100% when AI manages the field's continuing advancement without human participation. This rates the outcome's contribution to that transition, not the percentage of tasks solved, a measured fraction of the field, or time remaining.

The shared scoring rubric uses five equally weighted dimensions: execution, breadth, agenda-setting, validation, and sustained autonomous improvement. Points for this outcome are 5 + 5 + 5 + 5 + 5 = 25/100, in that order; each dimension has a maximum of 20. These component judgments make the estimate inspectable, but are not independently measured scores.

Reason for the estimate: Agents can explore simulated systems, but physical facility time, cost and independent resolution of scientific questions remain unmeasured. The dated baseline below supplies the findings and source links used for this assessment. Unmeasured components receive no demonstrated-progress credit; missing evidence does not prove a missing capability.

What would move the score: Preregister a scientific question; compare physical experiment counts, beam/robot time and full cost to a matched expert design strategy. Higher autonomy scores additionally require AI to select worthwhile work, validate results and improve the process over repeated cycles without human research management, repair or adjudication. Lower the score if replication fails, quality regresses or previously hidden human assistance is found. Preserve this dated estimate when adding future assessments.

Measurement and acceptance rule

Experiments, facility time, and total cost needed to resolve a prespecified scientific question.

Evidence requirements

Release equations, assumptions, units, code, and data needed to reproduce the result. Verify dimensional consistency and applicable physical constraints. Test outside the fitted range when scientifically appropriate. Use blind analysis and correction for multiple hypothesis searches. Mathematical derivations can use formal proof where practical, but formal correctness does not substitute for empirical validation of physical assumptions.

Related milestones

See the area's proposed milestones. Proposed targets are distinct from the dated evidence below.

Baseline as of November 7 2026

Status: Simulated exploration progress; facility-cost metric unknown. Sources accessed November 7, 2026. This is a documentary baseline, not an independent replication or an assertion of the worldwide best result. An unknown measurement is not zero.

Dated findings

September 29, 2025 preprint; 2026 journal publication: SciExplorer studies agents investigating simulated mechanical, wave and quantum many-body systems. SciExplorer.

Interpretation and tracking value

Choosing informative simulated experiments is not measured reduction in physical facility time or dollars. Simulator access and human setup must be counted.

Next comparable measurement

Preregister a scientific question; compare physical experiment counts, beam/robot time and full cost to a matched expert design strategy. Preserve this dated observation; append future results with their model/system version, denominator, budget and evidence level rather than overwriting it.