The Information Machine

DeepMind Co-Scientist: AI Research Partner Launch and Case Studies · history

Version 7

2026-05-24 21:08 UTC · 130 items

What

Google DeepMind's Co-Scientist — a multi-agent AI system built on Gemini that generates and debates scientific hypotheses — was published in Nature on May 19, 2026, as one of three simultaneous papers on AI-driven scientific discovery [9][12][10]. The critical response has now crossed from editorial commentary into peer-reviewed literature: Nature Communications published a paper titled 'Risks of AI scientists: prioritizing safeguarding over autonomy' [18], Nature News covered the Co-Scientist publication as a landmark [21], and Retraction Watch — which tracks research misconduct — has amplified the 'AI, peer review and the human activity of science' framing [19]. Meanwhile, the competitive landscape is becoming visible: Elicit, Consensus, and SciSpace are appearing in 2026 AI research tool roundups and benchmarks alongside Co-Scientist-class capabilities [25][26][27][28][29].

Why it matters

A peer-reviewed paper specifically on AI scientist risks in a Nature family journal [18], combined with Retraction Watch's engagement [19], marks a meaningful escalation: the critique of AI autonomy in science is moving from editorial commentary to citable peer-reviewed literature, and the research integrity community — which has standing to influence how journals handle AI-generated science — is now visibly engaged. At the same time, Co-Scientist is no longer operating in a vacuum: a competitive market of AI hypothesis and literature tools is consolidating, raising the question of whether DeepMind's curated-partner model will be benchmarked against alternatives.

Open questions

  • 'Risks of AI scientists: prioritizing safeguarding over autonomy' [18] is a peer-reviewed paper in Nature Communications — what specific safeguards does it propose, does it engage Co-Scientist's methodology directly, and has DeepMind or any partner researcher responded publicly?

  • Retraction Watch's amplification of the 'AI, peer review and the human activity of science' framing [19] signals that the research integrity community is engaged — what specific integrity risks are they focused on: fabricated citations, unverifiable AI reasoning chains, or accountability gaps when AI-generated hypotheses fail replication?

  • SciSpace has launched a dedicated biomedical hypothesis generation agent [29] while Elicit, Consensus, and other tools appear in 2026 roundups [25][26][27][28] — has any independent benchmark compared Co-Scientist's hypothesis quality against these alternatives, or do all evaluations remain within DeepMind's curated partner network?

  • Nature News framed the Co-Scientist publication as a landmark [21] — does its coverage address the methodological critiques (single-expert comparison in liver fibrosis, curated partner selection across all case studies) that independent skeptics have raised [23][24], or does it largely accept DeepMind's framing?

Narrative

Google DeepMind's Co-Scientist is a multi-agent AI system designed to function as an active research partner — generating scientific hypotheses, running internal debate rounds between specialized agent roles, and proposing experimental strategies — rather than as a passive literature search tool. Its public rollout in May 2026 was staged as a coordinated media and platform event: a brief acknowledgement post on May 12 [1] was followed on May 16 by five detailed case studies published simultaneously [2][3][4][5][6], then on May 17 by a platform announcement situating Co-Scientist within the new Gemini for Science umbrella [7], and on May 18 by a sixth case study on cellular aging [8]. On May 19, three DeepMind papers on AI-driven scientific discovery appeared simultaneously in Nature: the Co-Scientist paper 'An AI Co-Scientist for Hypothesis Generation' [9]; an ERA paper on automating expert-level empirical scientific software [10][11]; and a paper titled 'Towards end-to-end automation of AI research' [12], linked in social commentary to a system called Robin [13][14].

The Co-Scientist case studies make specific, quantifiable claims across six biomedical domains. In liver fibrosis drug repurposing, Co-Scientist proposed three candidates; two blocked fibrosis and promoted liver cell regeneration in lab tests, while both candidates chosen by lead human expert Gary Peltz showed no benefit — with the top AI pick, vorinostat, blocking 91% of a key damage response driving liver scarring [2]. In MASH research, Co-Scientist generated a novel hypothesis implicating the NLRP3 inflammasome as the molecular bridge between inflammation and metabolism, explaining why the approved drug resmetirom helps only a narrow patient population — a connection later experimentally verified [4]. In infectious disease research, a researcher reports work normally requiring two to three years is now on track to complete in six months [6]. In cellular aging, Co-Scientist scanned tens of thousands of papers in days and proposed more than 20 genetic factors for reversing cellular senescence, with lab validation confirming some drove cells into a younger functional state [8]. An ALS case study showed Co-Scientist surfacing an RNA biology gap that catalyzed a new cross-lab collaboration [3]. Gemini for Science groups these tools — Hypothesis Generation (Co-Scientist), Computational Discovery (AlphaEvolve and ERA), and Literature Insights (NotebookLM) — with partnerships covering more than 100 institutions and enterprise private previews from BASF, Daiichi Sankyo, Bayer Crop Science, and Klarna [7]. Google I/O 2026 amplified the full platform to mainstream tech audiences [15][16].

Critical responses have now entered peer-reviewed literature rather than remaining confined to editorial commentary. Nature published a companion commentary titled 'Why AI cannot do good science without humans' [17] alongside the research papers — the first peer-level institutional framing questioning AI autonomy in science at the same venue as the Co-Scientist paper. Nature Communications has separately published a paper titled 'Risks of AI scientists: prioritizing safeguarding over autonomy' [18], adding a citable peer-reviewed voice explicitly focused on the risk dimension. Retraction Watch — an organization that specifically tracks research misconduct and integrity failures — has amplified content framed around 'AI, peer review and the human activity of science' [19], signaling that the research integrity community is now engaged with these questions. An Educational Technology and Change Journal piece [20] responded to a Nature editorial from March 25, 2026 on AI scientists, indicating that institutional debate about AI's role in science predates the May publications by at least two months. Nature News itself covered the Co-Scientist publication as a landmark [21], while Resultsense framed the same papers as showing 'real limits' [22].

All six Co-Scientist case studies are authored and curated by DeepMind and involve researchers in formal partnerships, creating a selection effect where failures or null results are invisible. Independent online skeptics have requested experimental controls for the cellular aging results [23] and flagged the in vitro to clinical translation gap [24], but no organized independent replication effort has emerged. The competitive landscape is becoming more visible: Elicit, Consensus, and other AI research tools are being compared in 2026 roundups [25][26][27][28], and SciSpace has launched a dedicated hypothesis generation agent for biomedical research [29] — a direct competitor to Co-Scientist's core capability. On the commercial front, Edward Hughes — a co-lead of DeepMind's AI Scientist project — has departed to co-found Inherent, a stealth AI research startup backed by Index Ventures [30], signaling that the AI-scientist concept is crossing from research infrastructure into venture-backed commercial competition.

Timeline

  • 2026-03-25: Nature publishes an editorial on AI scientists; Educational Technology and Change Journal later publishes a response to this editorial [20]
  • 2026-05-12: Co-Scientist announced as a multi-agent AI research partner; contributor acknowledgements published [1]
  • 2026-05-16: Five simultaneous case studies published: liver fibrosis drug repurposing, ALS interdisciplinary collaboration, MASH NLRP3 hypothesis, Calico aging ISR research, infectious disease protein targeting [2][3][4][5][6]
  • 2026-05-17: Gemini for Science platform launched, encompassing Co-Scientist, AlphaEvolve, ERA, and NotebookLM; partnerships with 100+ institutions and enterprise private previews announced [7]
  • 2026-05-18: Cellular aging reversal case study published: Co-Scientist proposed 20+ genetic factors for senescence reversal, some lab-validated [8]
  • 2026-05-19: Three DeepMind papers published simultaneously in Nature: Co-Scientist 'An AI Co-Scientist for Hypothesis Generation,' ERA paper on empirical scientific software automation, and 'Towards end-to-end automation of AI research' (Robin); Nature also publishes companion commentary 'Why AI cannot do good science without humans'; Nature News publishes 'How to build an AI scientist: first peer-reviewed paper spills the secrets' [9][31][32][46][47][11][48][10][12][17][21]
  • 2026-05-20: First skeptical public commentary appears requesting experimental controls and flagging in vitro to clinical gap; Resultsense publishes analytical piece framing papers as showing 'AI co-scientists' real limits'; broad international social media amplification [23][24][49][50][51][52][53][22]
  • 2026-05-21: LabCritics publishes analytical piece framing Co-Scientist's arc from research demo to Nature publication; sustained multilingual social amplification [39][54][55][56][57][58][59][60][61][62][63]
  • 2026-05-22: Google I/O 2026 features Gemini for Science tools; mainstream tech outlet coverage including AP News, The Verge, Engadget, CNET, Mashable, Yahoo Tech, and Google Cloud blog; Index Ventures backs Inherent, stealth AI research startup co-founded by DeepMind AI Scientist lead Edward Hughes [33][34][64][36][35][40][41][42][43][65][66][44][45][30][67][68][69][70][16][15]
  • 2026-05-23: Continued social amplification; Substack frames Google I/O as an agentic AI platform shift rather than a model launch [71][72][13][73]
  • 2026-05-24: Retraction Watch amplifies 'AI, peer review and the human activity of science' framing; Nature Communications paper 'Risks of AI scientists: prioritizing safeguarding over autonomy' identified; competitor landscape visible in 2026 AI research tool roundups including Elicit, Consensus, and SciSpace hypothesis generation agent [19][18][25][26][27][28][29]

Perspectives

Google DeepMind

Argues Co-Scientist and the Gemini for Science platform represent foundational infrastructure for a new era of scientific discovery driven by general AI agents rather than narrow specialized models; presents multiple peer-reviewed and experimentally validated case studies as proof of concept; ERA and the Robin paper extend the claim to automating empirical software and end-to-end research

Evolution: Consistent across all items; Yossi Matias (Google VP) amplified the multi-agent architecture framing via LinkedIn alongside the Google I/O launch

[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][31][32][33][34][11][35][36][37][38][15]

Gary Peltz (liver fibrosis researcher)

Found Co-Scientist's drug candidates superior to his own expert-selected picks in lab validation; endorses the AI's strategy of broad epigenetic reshaping over single-pathway targeting as worthy of clinical consideration

Evolution: Consistent

[2]

Smita Raman and Brian Flynn (ALS researchers)

Co-Scientist's literature analysis surfaced an RNA biology gap in Raman's expertise, catalyzing a new cross-lab collaboration now pursuing RNA-based ALS therapies

Evolution: Consistent

[3]

Nicola Bryant (infectious disease researcher)

Co-Scientist identified a previously unnoticed protein and drilled down to specific amino-acid targets, compressing years of planned experimental work into months

Evolution: Consistent

[6]

Calico research team (Morgan Onsum cited)

Impressed by Co-Scientist's ability to filter noise and non-replicating findings in aging literature, producing an ISR-metabolism hypothesis now headed toward publication

Evolution: Consistent

[5]

Enterprise partners (BASF, Daiichi Sankyo, Bayer Crop Science, Klarna)

Using Gemini for Science tools in private preview; no substantive public statements on outcomes yet

Evolution: Consistent

[7]

Nature editorial commentary

Published 'Why AI cannot do good science without humans' alongside the Co-Scientist and companion papers — the first peer-level institutional framing questioning whether AI can conduct rigorous science autonomously; Nature News simultaneously framed the Co-Scientist publication as a landmark [21], creating a dual posture of amplification and caution within the same journal

Evolution: Expanded: Nature News coverage [21] adds a promotional register that sits alongside the critical commentary, revealing Nature's institutional posture is not purely skeptical

[17][20][21]

Nature Communications (AI scientist risks paper)

Published 'Risks of AI scientists: prioritizing safeguarding over autonomy' — a peer-reviewed paper explicitly framing AI scientist risk in terms of safeguarding over autonomy, adding a citable critical voice within the Nature family distinct from the editorial commentary

Evolution: First appearance; represents the first peer-reviewed paper specifically on AI scientist risks in this thread, moving critique from commentary into primary literature

[18]

Retraction Watch

Amplified content framed around 'AI, peer review and the human activity of science,' signaling that the research integrity and misconduct-tracking community is now engaged with AI's role in scientific publishing

Evolution: First appearance; introduces the research integrity community as a new stakeholder audience beyond academic critics and tech press

[19]

Educational Technology and Change Journal

Published a response to Nature's March 2026 editorial on AI scientists, indicating that institutional debate about AI's role in science extends at least two months before the May Co-Scientist Nature publication

Evolution: Consistent since first appearance; adds historical depth to the institutional critique register

[20]

Resultsense (analytical press)

Explicitly frames the two Nature AI co-scientist papers as revealing 'real limits' of the systems, a more skeptical analytical register than either uncritical tech amplifiers or the LabCritics arc-framing piece

Evolution: Consistent since first appearance

[22]

Analytical science press (LabCritics)

Frames Co-Scientist's publication in Nature as a meaningful graduation from demo to peer-reviewed record, implying the trajectory warrants serious examination rather than dismissal or uncritical acceptance

Evolution: Consistent; now joined by Resultsense in the analytical-press register with a more critical valence

[39]

Mainstream tech press (AP News, The Verge, Engadget, CNET, Mashable, Yahoo Tech)

Amplifies Google I/O 2026 Gemini for Science announcements without substantive critical analysis; frames developments as product launches rather than research claims

Evolution: Consistent

[40][41][42][43][44][45][16]

Edward Hughes / Inherent / Index Ventures

Hughes's departure from DeepMind to co-found a stealth AI research startup backed by Index Ventures implicitly signals that the AI-scientist concept has reached venture viability — a vote of commercial confidence in the space, but one outside DeepMind's control

Evolution: Consistent since first appearance; no new product details have emerged

[30]

Independent online skeptics

Cautiously skeptical: one commenter explicitly requests experimental controls for the cellular aging results before crediting the claims [23]; a Japanese commenter flags that the cellular aging results are in vitro and clinical translation remains distant [24]

Evolution: Consistent; no new organized critique has emerged, and these voices remain isolated rather than coordinated

[23][24]

AI research tool competitors (Elicit, Consensus, SciSpace)

Elicit, Consensus, and other AI literature and hypothesis tools are being compared in 2026 roundups; SciSpace has launched a dedicated biomedical hypothesis generation agent — positioning these tools as market alternatives to Co-Scientist's core capabilities without directly engaging DeepMind's claims

Evolution: First appearance as a named competitive set in this thread; their presence in roundups suggests the market has moved from novelty to comparison-shopping

[25][26][27][28][29]

Tensions

  • DeepMind claims Co-Scientist and Gemini for Science represent 'foundational infrastructure for a new era of scientific discovery driven by general AI agents' [7], while Nature simultaneously published a commentary titled 'Why AI cannot do good science without humans' [17] and Nature Communications published a peer-reviewed paper on 'Risks of AI scientists: prioritizing safeguarding over autonomy' [18] — the same publishing family accepting the Co-Scientist paper also running peer-reviewed and editorial content questioning AI autonomy in science [7][17][18]
  • All six case studies are authored and curated by DeepMind and involve researchers in formal partnerships, creating a selection effect where failures or null results are invisible; independent skeptics request controls [23] and Resultsense frames this as showing 'real limits' [22], but no organized independent experimental assessment has appeared despite the Nature publication making full methods available [2][4][5][6][8][23][24][22]
  • The liver fibrosis result frames AI-selected candidates as outperforming a named human expert [2], but the comparison involves a single expert and three AI candidates versus two human ones — a framing that invites pushback on experimental design and cherry-picking that neither independent reviewers nor the Nature commentary [17] has publicly mounted in detail [2][17]
  • DeepMind's stated thesis — that general agents, not narrow specialized models, are the future of scientific AI [7] — runs counter to the dominant industry and academic practice of fine-tuning narrow domain-specific models; the Nature Communications safeguarding paper [18] and the Nature editorial commentary [17] represent institutional peer-reviewed dissent, while the ETC Journal's response to the March Nature editorial [20] shows this debate predates the May publications [7][17][18][20]
  • Nature's dual posture — publishing Co-Scientist's research paper and a News piece framing it as a landmark [21], while simultaneously publishing a critical commentary [17] and hosting a peer-reviewed risks paper in Nature Communications [18] — creates an internal institutional tension between amplification and caution at the same publisher [21][17][18]

Sources

  1. [1] Co-Scientist: A multi-agent AI partner to accelerate research — DeepMind Blog (2026-05-12)
  2. [2] Uncovering repurposed medicines to fight liver fibrosis — DeepMind Blog (2026-05-16)
  3. [3] Uniting biological toolkits for a new approach to ALS — DeepMind Blog (2026-05-16)
  4. [4] Accelerating discovery of liver disease mechanisms — DeepMind Blog (2026-05-16)
  5. [5] Opening new paths in aging research — DeepMind Blog (2026-05-16)
  6. [6] Finding the molecular switches behind new infectious diseases — DeepMind Blog (2026-05-16)
  7. [7] Gemini for Science: AI experiments and tools for a new era of discovery — DeepMind Blog (2026-05-17)
  8. [8] Fast-tracking genetic leads to reverse cellular aging — DeepMind Blog (2026-05-18)
  9. [9] Accelerating scientific discovery with Co-Scientist - Nature — reactive:deepmind-co-scientist-launch
  10. [10] An AI system to help scientists write expert-level empirical software — reactive:deepmind-co-scientist-launch
  11. [11] An AI system to help scientists write expert-level empirical software — reactive:deepmind-co-scientist-launch
  12. [12] Towards end-to-end automation of AI research - Nature — reactive:deepmind-co-scientist-launch
  13. [13] Three Nature papers on AI automating scientific discovery dropped May 19. Robin, Co-Scientist (DeepMind), and ERA. Hypot... — reactive:deepmind-co-scientist-launch (2026-05-23)
  14. [14] Nature research paper: Towards end-to-end automation of AI research — reactive:deepmind-co-scientist-launch
  15. [15] 100 things we announced at I/O 2026 - Google Blog — reactive:google-io-2026-launch-blitz
  16. [16] Google I/O 2026: AI advances announced for search and Gemini — reactive:deepmind-co-scientist-launch
  17. [17] Why AI cannot do good science without humans - Nature — reactive:deepmind-co-scientist-launch
  18. [18] Risks of AI scientists: prioritizing safeguarding over autonomy - Nature — reactive:deepmind-co-scientist-launch
  19. [19] AI, peer review and the human activity of science - Facebook — reactive:deepmind-co-scientist-launch
  20. [20] A Response to Nature’s 25 March 2026 Editorial on AI Scientists | Educational Technology and Change Journal — reactive:deepmind-co-scientist-launch
  21. [21] How to build an AI scientist: first peer-reviewed paper spills the secrets — reactive:deepmind-co-scientist-launch
  22. [22] Two new Nature papers show AI co-scientists' real limits - Resultsense — reactive:deepmind-co-scientist-launch
  23. [23] DeepMind says Co-Scientist surfaced new factors that rejuvenate human cells. I want to see the controls. AI proposing ge... — reactive:deepmind-co-scientist-launch (2026-05-20)
  24. [24] 🧬 DeepMind の Co-Scientist が、老化を巻き戻す遺伝子候補 20 超を文献から提案。Abudayyeh-Gootenberg Lab の細胞実験で若返り指標が動いた、と発表。ただし in vitro の話で、臨床はまだ... — reactive:deepmind-co-scientist-launch (2026-05-20)
  25. [25] Elicit vs Consensus : Detailed Comparison 2026 — reactive:deepmind-co-scientist-launch
  26. [26] 8 Best AI Tools for Academic Research (2026): Tested on Real — reactive:deepmind-co-scientist-launch
  27. [27] Elicit vs Consensus (2026): Side-by-Side Comparison — reactive:deepmind-co-scientist-launch
  28. [28] Best Elicit Alternatives in 2026 — reactive:deepmind-co-scientist-launch
  29. [29] Hypothesis Generation for Biomedical Research — reactive:deepmind-co-scientist-launch
  30. [30] Index Ventures backs Inherent, stealth AI research startup co-founded by DeepMind AI Scientist lead Edward Hughes — reactive:deepmind-co-scientist-launch (2026-05-22)
  31. [31] An AI Co-Scientist for Hypothesis Generation from Google DeepMind — reactive:deepmind-co-scientist-launch (2026-05-20)
  32. [32] Our paper “Accelerating scientific discovery with Co-Scientist” is published today in @Nature. Read it here: https://t.c... — reactive:deepmind-co-scientist-launch (2026-05-19)
  33. [33] Empirical Research Assistance (ERA): From Nature publication to catalyzing Computational Discovery — reactive:deepmind-co-scientist-launch
  34. [34] New AI Tools for the Future of Science - Google Blog — reactive:deepmind-co-scientist-launch
  35. [35] AI system automates coding for scientific research | EurekAlert! — reactive:deepmind-co-scientist-launch
  36. [36] Innovations from Google I/O 26 on Google Cloud | Google Cloud Blog — reactive:google-io-agentic-ai
  37. [37] AI co-scientist, our multi-agent system is designed to augment human scientists, focusing on novel hypotheses generation that would accelerate scientific breakthroughs. | Yossi Matias — reactive:deepmind-co-scientist-launch
  38. [38] Gemini for Science - Google AI — reactive:deepmind-co-scientist-launch
  39. [39] Google DeepMind's Co-Scientist Graduates from Research Demo to ... — reactive:deepmind-co-scientist-launch
  40. [40] Google I/O 2026 Recap: Everything Announced - CNET — reactive:deepmind-co-scientist-launch
  41. [41] Google I/O 2026: Every new AI tool you can try for free | Mashable — reactive:deepmind-co-scientist-launch
  42. [42] Google I/O 2026: All the news and announcements | The Verge — reactive:deepmind-co-scientist-launch
  43. [43] All the news you might have missed from Google I/O 2026 - Engadget — reactive:deepmind-co-scientist-launch
  44. [44] Google launches Gemini for Science AI research toolkit — reactive:deepmind-co-scientist-launch
  45. [45] Google Debuts AI-Powered Tools To Optimize Scientific Research Workflows — reactive:deepmind-co-scientist-launch
  46. [46] **Three groundbreaking Nature papers published May 19, 2026, demonstrate AI systems automating key parts of scientific d... — reactive:deepmind-co-scientist-launch (2026-05-20)
  47. [47] An AI system to help scientists write expert-level empirical software | Nature — reactive:deepmind-co-scientist-launch
  48. [48] An AI system to help scientists write expert-level empirical software — reactive:deepmind-co-scientist-launch
  49. [49] Google Deepmind Co-Scientist will accelerate scientific breakthroughs. https://t.co/nx1UL3R3Xk — reactive:deepmind-co-scientist-launch (2026-05-21)
  50. [50] La IA no solo responde preguntas y construye código. Ahora formula hipótesis, las contrasta, debate y mejora procesos qu... — reactive:deepmind-co-scientist-launch (2026-05-21)
  51. [51] A DeepMind mostrou o Co-Scientist: um “comitê de pesquisa” de agentes que propõe hipóteses, debate evidências e monta pl... — reactive:deepmind-co-scientist-launch (2026-05-21)
  52. [52] Google DeepMind has unveiled “Co-Scientist,” a new multi-agent AI system built with Gemini to help researchers generate,... — reactive:deepmind-co-scientist-launch (2026-05-20)
  53. [53] Google DeepMind recently introduced Co-Scientist, a multi-agent AI system built on @Gemini that is designed to help rese... — reactive:deepmind-co-scientist-launch (2026-05-20)
  54. [54] Three agentic systems published in Nature yesterday. All on multi-agent AI for science. — reactive:deepmind-co-scientist-launch (2026-05-21)
  55. [55] 2026年5月19日、Google DeepMindが「Co-Scientist: A multi-agent AI partner to accelerate research」を公開しました。GeminiベースのマルチエージェントAI「... — reactive:deepmind-co-scientist-launch (2026-05-21)
  56. [56] Google DeepMind is basically building a digital laboratory now. From 'Gemini Omni' to 'Co-Scientist,' we're moving from ... — reactive:deepmind-co-scientist-launch (2026-05-21)
  57. [57] Google DeepMind has just unveiled Gemini for Science at Google I/O 2026 — an agentic suite targeting the full scientific... — reactive:deepmind-co-scientist-launch (2026-05-21)
  58. [58] Two AI scientist assistants capable of "thinking + doing + testing + improving" have been personally validated for effec... — reactive:deepmind-co-scientist-launch (2026-05-21)
  59. [59] Nature just published 3 papers that made me stop and think: — reactive:deepmind-co-scientist-launch (2026-05-22)
  60. [60] Co-Scientist: A multi-agent AI partner to accelerate research https://t.co/ZGLtnXenoi — reactive:deepmind-co-scientist-launch (2026-05-21)
  61. [61] 🧪 Google Launches Co-Scientist, an AI Research Partner for Real Labs — reactive:deepmind-co-scientist-launch (2026-05-21)
  62. [62] Co-Scientist: A multi-agent AI partner to accelerate research — reactive:deepmind-co-scientist-launch (2026-05-21)
  63. [63] @Burky77 @Dr_Singularity These two new Nature papers (May 19, 2026) highlight real progress in AI for science. — reactive:deepmind-co-scientist-launch (2026-05-21)
  64. [64] Material Intelligence – A New Era of AI-Driven Materials Discovery — reactive:deepmind-co-scientist-launch
  65. [65] Everything Announced at Google I/O 2026: Gemini, Search, Smart ... — reactive:deepmind-co-scientist-launch
  66. [66] Google's NEW AI Tools Will BLOW YOUR MIND | Google I/O 2026 — reactive:deepmind-co-scientist-launch
  67. [67] Three DeepMind papers in Nature this week. AI automating hypothesis generation, experiment design, AND scientific softwa... — reactive:deepmind-co-scientist-launch (2026-05-22)
  68. [68] Google DeepMind built an AI "Co-Scientist" to help invent new medicines. — reactive:deepmind-co-scientist-launch (2026-05-22)
  69. [69] google deepmind published Co-Scientist in Nature today. — reactive:deepmind-co-scientist-launch (2026-05-22)
  70. [70] معظم الناس ما زالوا يستخدمون AI للكتابة. — reactive:deepmind-co-scientist-launch (2026-05-22)
  71. [71] O Co-Scientist do DeepMind não é uma IA que pensa. São vários agentes debatendo entre si: um gera hipótese, outro critic... — reactive:deepmind-co-scientist-launch (2026-05-23)
  72. [72] O DeepMind mostrou o Co-Scientist: vários agentes geram hipóteses, criticam e refinam ideias de pesquisa. — reactive:deepmind-co-scientist-launch (2026-05-23)
  73. [73] Google I/O 2026 Was Not Just a Model Launch. It Was ... - Agentic AI — reactive:google-io-agentic-ai