arXiv integration for AI Flowi Workflow
The arXiv API integration in AI Flowi Workflow is a paper-search component named arXiv. Set search_query, choose one of five search_type values and inspect the dataframe Table output. The exported interface has no separate paper-download, citation-export or language-model input.
Its search interface is documented in the catalogue; not production-tested by Ai Flowi. The source is the AI Flowi Workflow 1.9.2 catalogue exported on 9 October 2026. The examples below explain query selection and result inspection without claiming that any paper was found or read.
By Ai Flowi · Published
Official source: arXiv API documentation
The arXiv component contract
The arXiv reference tables scroll within their own regions when the search fields need more room.
| Component / identity | Exact catalogue description | Use this interface for |
|---|---|---|
arXivarxiv.ArXivComponent | Search and retrieve papers from arXiv.org | Retrieve candidate paper records using a chosen search field. |
The catalogue index places this entry under arxiv. It provides the identity and description, while this page expands the field choices and the limits of the returned interface. For planning and drafting from multiple references, use the separate AI research report writer guide.
Three inputs for a bounded paper search
| Input | Type / required | Accepted connections / choices | Configuration meaning |
|---|---|---|---|
max_results | int / No | Types not exported | Integer result cap. The export gives no default, minimum, maximum or paging input. |
search_query | str / No | Message | Search text accepting a Message. Write the text to match the selected field. |
search_type | str / No | Types not exported Choices: "all", "title", "abstract", "author", "cat" | Field selector with the five exact values shown. No default or combined-field syntax is exported. |
For an arXiv trial, set the query, field mode and intended cap explicitly so another reader can distinguish a topic search from an author search without guessing editor defaults.
Choose the field that matches the paper question
| Choice | Question to investigate | Query preparation |
|---|---|---|
"all" | Find candidate records around a topic. | Start with topic terms; inspect which part of a record actually supports the match. |
"title" | Locate records with a particular title phrase. | Use a title phrase from the research question, not an assumed record identifier. |
"abstract" | Search for a method or concept discussed in the abstract. | Choose the substantive concept and review the returned abstract if available. |
"author" | Investigate records associated with an author name. | Supply the intended name and check identity rather than assuming similar names are the same person. |
"cat" | Investigate a selected subject category. | Verify the category value and matching syntax; the export lists the selector, not category codes. |
These are reasons to select a field, not claims about exact matching rules. The catalogue gives no definition of phrase quoting, case sensitivity, multi-author matching or field combinations. Switching from "title" to "author" while leaving topic text unchanged would ask a different question, so review the query whenever you change the selector.
What the arXiv Table does and does not specify
| Component identity | Display label | Port name | Type |
|---|---|---|---|
arxiv.ArXivComponent | Table | dataframe | Table |
The output is labelled Table and named dataframe; no column names appear in the export. Before building a formatter, inspect whether the result contains usable paper references and which fields identify a record, version or source location. Record the fields you actually observe instead of creating mappings for assumed title, abstract or author columns.
A retrieved record is a candidate reference. Its presence in a search result is not verification of peer review, replication, methodological quality or a current literature conclusion. Preserve the reference and read the relevant material before describing what a paper establishes. If identifiers or links are absent from the returned representation, resolve the reference before using it as evidence.
Access requirements and the first inspection flow
arXiv exports search controls rather than a credential input; consult the connection reference for access setup applicable to your deployment.
example configuration, not a recorded test
- Add arXiv, identity
arxiv.ArXivComponent. Setsearch_queryto the illustrative phraseretrieval augmented generation. - Select
"title"insearch_typeand setmax_resultsto5. Five is a proposed trial limit, not an exported default or evidence of five matches. - Add Chat Output for inspecting paper records, with arXiv’s
dataframeconnected toinput_value. - Inspect the returned records before adding any synthesis node. Save the query, selector and cap alongside the paper references you can actually resolve.
- Run a separate field exercise with
search_typeset to"author"andsearch_queryset toIllustrative Author. That synthetic name is only a configuration example; no real author or expected result is asserted.
The Chat Output contract supplies presentation settings for the candidate paper records.
Compare query modes without inventing relevance
Use "all" for a separate topic exploration when you have not decided which field expresses the research question. Inspect the part of each paper record that explains the match. A broad match to a subject term cannot establish that the paper evaluated the particular method in your review; the field exercise below addresses that decision.
When is the arXiv interface insufficient?
There is no exported sort order, publication-date filter, start offset, download format or timeout control. The "cat" selector does not supply a category-code list. A fixed max_results value cannot establish that the search exhausted the relevant literature, and the port does not define a missing-result or provider-error schema.
Use another documented retrieval route if your task requires a specific full document or a known source file. Do not describe the displayed records as complete paper content unless your inspection establishes that content. For a research conclusion, follow the linked report guide after you have resolved and reviewed the sources; search discovery alone cannot carry that conclusion.
Related: DuckDuckGo Search integration for AI Flowi Workflow; Wikipedia and Wikidata integration for AI Flowi Workflow.
Work through a title-to-abstract search decision
Imagine the research question asks for papers discussing a method, but the initial phrase names the wider subject. Start the proposed title exercise with retrieval augmented generation and inspect whether the titles identify the method being investigated. If the method could appear only in a paper’s discussion, a title-only query is a poor fit for that question. This is a reason to prepare an abstract exercise, not evidence that the first search missed a particular paper.
For the next proposed query, choose "abstract" and write the method phrase you want to investigate. Explain the purpose of this change: the question has moved from words identifying a paper to words discussing its content. Keep max_results unchanged. If you also substitute a narrower phrase, describe the exercise as a new search question rather than a controlled comparison of selectors. That distinction prevents a change in wording from being credited to the field choice.
When a record appears relevant, inspect enough of the actual paper to decide whether the method was proposed, evaluated, mentioned as background or criticized. Those roles lead to different uses in a literature discussion. A matching abstract phrase does not establish which role applies. For example, a paper describing another method as a baseline belongs in a different comparison position from one developing that method. Keep this judgment attached to the inspected paper, rather than using the selector as a quality label.
For author discovery, begin a separate exercise with a name rather than recycling the topic phrase. A matching name needs identity review: inspect the paper’s author context and any identifying information available before attributing a body of work to one person. If the returned representation lacks enough detail, leave attribution unresolved. Changing to "cat" raises another prerequisite: obtain the intended category value and syntax before treating the textbox as a supported category-code selector.
The useful endpoint of these exercises is a decision about which field serves the research question. It is not a statement that the chosen field covers the literature. If the task instead asks for a known paper by an exact reference, first check whether a returned record resolves that reference; do not count a similarly titled paper as the same work. For a date-bounded review, the missing date-filter control is a reason to choose a documented route that can express the boundary.
Paper-search usage
Plans: Go from USD8/month billed yearly (USD10 monthly), Plus from USD16 (USD20 monthly), Pro 100 from USD80 (USD100 monthly), Pro 200 from USD160 (USD200 monthly) and Pro 500 from USD400 (USD500 monthly), with 5,000 to 250,000 Flowi Tokens/month and top-ups; 1 token per node run; third-party API and model usage is not included.
Browse the integration categories for other source interfaces, while keeping each source’s query and output contract separate from this paper-search selector.