In the Stokes case a number of researchers that where close to the solution suspect OpenAI was reading their homework.

LLM's certainly have the capability of extracting novel correlations from their vast training sets. But whether that really counts as "new thinking" remains to be seen.

On a couple of those, it’s because the scientists involved had been using LLMs in their work and it scooped them because it knew where to look. IIRC the consensus in the field had been that computer time would have been required.

LLMs had been used to solve problems as tools long before corporations started shoving it down our throats. That's doesn't give it some magical self awareness or ability to innovate. It was able to do all the things you linked because of people that know how to use it.