Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This paper introduces an agentic, framework-based approach to reproduce machine health intelligence (MHI) papers, addressing the challenge of under-specified methods and inconsistent evaluation settings in the field. The core idea is to translate papers into a shared PHM benchmark framework using a slot-binding interface, explicitly recording unresolved assumptions and standardizing task contracts. Experiments on 16 PHM papers demonstrate that this framework-enhanced agentic reproduction improves reproduction success, enables model-based code evaluation, and ensures cross-paper benchmark comparability compared to framework-free approaches.
Stop reimplementing papers in isolation: a framework-guided agent can turn under-specified methods into executable, assumption-aware, and systematically comparable benchmarks.
Industrial Prognostics and Health Management (PHM) provides a representative case study for a broader challenge in applied machine learning: translating published papers into executable, benchmark-ready implementations. Reproducing under-specified methods in PHM is particularly difficult due to restricted access to industrial datasets, incomplete reporting of preprocessing and evaluation protocols, and implicit design choices (e.g., windowing, target construction, data splits) that critically affect performance. Existing paper-to-code systems generate implementations for individual papers, but these artifacts are often not directly comparable due to inconsistencies in assumptions and evaluation settings. We introduce \emph{agentic, framework-based PHM paper reproduction}, where an agent translates a paper into a shared PHM benchmark framework via a \emph{slot-binding interface}. This interface maps equations and protocol descriptions into structured components (task definitions, dataset adapters, windowing, targets, models, and evaluators), while explicitly recording unresolved assumptions. The resulting implementations are validated against standardized task contracts and evaluation hooks, enabling consistent and comparable benchmarking. We evaluate this approach on 16 PHM papers, comparing framework-enhanced, skill-based and prompt-based agentic reproduction against a recent framework-free paper-reproduction agent. We assess reproduction success, model-based code evaluation, framework binding of paper assumptions, and cross-paper benchmark comparability under standardized protocols. Our results show that coupling agentic generation with a shared framework transforms paper reproduction from isolated code synthesis into executable, assumption-aware, and systematically comparable benchmark implementations.
