Research scientists increasingly rely on implementing software to support their research. While previous research has examined the impact of identifier names on program comprehension in traditional programming environments, limited work has explored this area in scientific software, especially regarding the quality of method names in the code. The recent advances in Large Language Models (LLMs) present new opportunities for automating code analysis tasks, such as identifier name appraisals and recommendations. Our study evaluates four popular LLMs on their ability to analyze grammatical patterns and suggest improvements for 496 method names extracted from Python-based Jupyter Notebooks. Our findings show that the LLMs are somewhat effective in analyzing these method names and generally follow good naming practices, like starting method names with verbs. However, their inconsistent handling of domain-specific terminology and only moderate agreement with human annotations indicate that automated suggestions require human evaluation. This work provides foundational insights for improving the quality of scientific code through AI automation.