Track papers across labs, topics, and trends.
Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
To evaluate how test-time compute scaling translates to open-ended agentic workflows, the authors benchmarked nine LLMs across 50 end-to-end quantitative factor-mining tasks requiring hypothesis interpretation, code generation, and iterative empirical refinement. The study reveals that parallel exploration consistently outperforms sequential search under identical iteration budgets, while deeper search budgets systematically compress the performance gap between weaker and frontier models. Trajectory and model-grafting analyses show that early research decisions disproportionately constrain final performance, with top models succeeding primarily through superior failure diagnosis and hypothesis fidelity rather than raw code-generation capability.
Parallel exploration beats sequential refinement when scaling agent test-time compute, but early-stage trajectory errors create persistent bottlenecks that deeper search and downstream model grafting struggle to overcome.
Inference scaling has been shown to improve large language model (LLM) performance, and this principle naturally extends to autonomous LLM agents through increased search budgets, which we refer to as *search scaling*. Although prior work has characterized the mechanisms, scaling behavior, and performance limits of LLM inference scaling, much less is known about these questions in autonomous research. Therefore, we investigate how search scaling affects research performance and what mechanisms drive these gains using 50 quantitative factor-mining tasks grounded in financial research reports. Each task requires an agent to carry out an end-to-end research loop, from interpreting a hypothesis and implementing it in code to evaluating and iteratively refining the resulting factor. Across nine models, we examine how model capability, search depth, and search organization shape factor quality by tracing performance across varying budgets, transferring intermediate research states between models, and comparing different search strategies. We find that (1) initial performance is more strongly associated with model capability, while deeper search can narrow cross-model gaps; (2) model grafting shows that the early research state materially shapes final performance; and (3) parallel search outperforms sequential search under the same iteration budget, consistent with benefits from broader coverage of the search space. Further trajectory analysis shows that higher-performing models more effectively diagnose failures, revise search directions, and preserve the intended economic hypothesis when selecting candidates. These findings suggest that future progress in autonomous research will require stronger models together with adaptive policies for deploying test-time computation throughout the research process.