Skip to content
DraconiticResearch
Search Sources API
182,469 studies31 sourcesUpdated 1 min ago
PreprintarXiv licencearXiv

HALO: A Physics-Aware LLM Agent Framework for Nanophotonic Design

Abstract

Language models have recently been applied to nanophotonic design, but it remains unclear whether they can reliably translate optical objectives into simulation-ready designs, execute electromagnetic analysis, and revise decisions from numerical feedback. We introduce HALO, a physics-aware framework that couples language-model planners with typed design specifications, electromagnetic simulation, diagnostic evaluation, and optional reuse of prior failure trajectories in an iterative design loop. We further introduce HALO-Bench, a 52-task benchmark spanning lab-derived, paper-derived, and open-ended nanophotonic design tasks under a shared evaluation protocol. We compare three planner configurations: a Fixed Structured Workflow, an Autonomous Structured Agent using the same simulation interface, and an Autonomous Coding Agent that directly writes and executes simulation code. The Fixed Structured Workflow is the most token-efficient and exhibits no observed code- or path-level failures, while autonomous coding can achieve higher task success with stronger models at the cost of additional operational failures. We also study reuse of prior failed trajectories. On targeted multi-round tasks, retrieved failure feedback reduces both iterations to first success and total token use. These results clarify the tradeoffs between explicit interfaces, autonomous execution, and reusable design experience in scientific agents.

Related

  1. Designing an AI Agent That Does Not Tutor: Design Rules for Socratic Probing in Introductory Physics
    Byungmoon Cho
    arXivPreprintCC BY 4.0Full textGeneral physicsarXiv
  2. Solver Agent: an Agentic AI Framework for Theoretical Physics Computations Applied to F-theory Uplifts of O3-planes and S-folds
    Eliott Morgensztern, Cesar Fierro Cota, Alessandro Mininno
    HALPreprintarXiv licenceFull textAlgebra & number theoryMathematical physicsHALarXiv
  3. Photonics-GCCE: group collaborative-competitive evolution multi-agent framework for universal and autonomous optical design
    Weijie Xu, Ming Wang, Ruicheng Ma +20
    arXivPreprintarXiv licenceFull textOptics & photonicsarXiv
  4. A Physics-based and Geometry-aware Reduced-order Framework for Accelerated Part-Scale Thermomechanical Simulation of Additive Friction Stir Deposition Process
    Apurba Sarker, Sourav Saha
    arXivPreprintCC BY-NC-SA 4.0Full textComputational physicsCondensed matterarXiv
  5. Fast Nanophotonic Inverse Design using Precomputed Numerical Green Functions
    Thi Phuong Thao Nguyen, James Wang, Constantine Sideris
    arXivPreprintCC BY-NC-ND 4.0Full textNumerical analysis & scientific computingComputational physicsarXiv
BibTeX
@misc{zhang2026halo,
  title = {{HALO: A Physics-Aware LLM Agent Framework for Nanophotonic Design}},
  author = {Yubo Zhang and Jinlin Xiang and Zijun Zhao and Yang Zhao and Eli Shlizerman and Arka Majumdar},
  howpublished = {arXiv},
  year = {2026},
  month = sep,
  doi = {10.48550/arxiv.2608.28877},
  eprint = {2608.28877},
  archivePrefix = {arXiv},
  url = {https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.28877},
}
RIS
TY  - UNPB
TI  - HALO: A Physics-Aware LLM Agent Framework for Nanophotonic Design
AU  - Yubo Zhang
AU  - Jinlin Xiang
AU  - Zijun Zhao
AU  - Yang Zhao
AU  - Eli Shlizerman
AU  - Arka Majumdar
PY  - 2026
DA  - 2026/09/07
PB  - arXiv
DO  - 10.48550/arxiv.2608.28877
UR  - https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.28877
AB  - Language models have recently been applied to nanophotonic design, but it remains unclear whether they can reliably translate optical objectives into simulation-ready designs, execute electromagnetic analysis, and revise decisions from numerical feedback. We introduce HALO, a physics-aware framework that couples language-model planners with typed design specifications, electromagnetic simulation, diagnostic evaluation, and optional reuse of prior failure trajectories in an iterative design loop. We further introduce HALO-Bench, a 52-task benchmark spanning lab-derived, paper-derived, and open-ended nanophotonic design tasks under a shared evaluation protocol. We compare three planner configurations: a Fixed Structured Workflow, an Autonomous Structured Agent using the same simulation interface, and an Autonomous Coding Agent that directly writes and executes simulation code. The Fixed Structured Workflow is the most token-efficient and exhibits no observed code- or path-level failures, while autonomous coding can achieve higher task success with stronger models at the cost of additional operational failures. We also study reuse of prior failed trajectories. On targeted multi-round tasks, retrieved failure feedback reduces both iterations to first success and total token use. These results clarify the tradeoffs between explicit interfaces, autonomous execution, and reusable design experience in scientific agents.
ER  -