Scientific progress increasingly relies on effective collaboration among researchers, a dynamic that large language models (LLMs) have only begun to emulate. While recent LLM-based scientist agents show promise in autonomous scientific discovery, they often lack the interactive reasoning and evaluation mechanisms essential to real-world research. We propose IDVSCI (Internal Discussion and Vote SCIentists), a multi-agent framework built on LLMs that incorporates two key innovations: a Dynamic Knowledge Exchange mechanism enabling iterative feedback among agents, and a Dual-Diversity Review paradigm that simulates heterogeneous expert evaluation. These components jointly promote deeper reasoning and the generation of more creative and impactful scientific ideas. To evaluate the effectiveness and generalizability of our approach, we conduct experiments on two datasets: a widely used benchmark in computer science and a new dataset we introduce in the health sciences domain. Results show that IDVSCI consistently achieves the best performance across both datasets, outperforming existing systems such as AI Scientist and VIRSCI. These findings highlight the value of modeling interaction and peer review dynamics in LLM-based autonomous research.
View on arXiv