6GAgentGym: Tool Use, Data Synthesis, and Agentic Learning for Network Management
Organizations: Shenzhen Smart City Technology Development Group Company, Ltd. · Shien-Ming Wu School of Intelligent Engineering, South China University of Technology · China Unicom Group Co., Ltd.
Abstract
Autonomous 6G network management requires agents that can execute tools, observe the resulting state changes, and adapt their decisions accordingly. Existing benchmarks based on static questions or scripted episode replay, however, do not support such closed-loop interaction, limiting agents to passive evaluation without the ability to learn from environmental feedback. This paper presents 6GAgentGym to provide closed-loop capability. The framework provides an interactive environment with 42 typed tools whose effect classification distinguishes read-only observation from state-mutating configuration, backed by a learned Experiment Model calibrated on NS-3 simulation data. 6G-Forge bootstraps closed-loop training trajectories from NS-3 seeds via iterative Self-Instruct generation with execution verification against the Experiment Model. Supervised fine-tuning on the resulting corpus followed by reinforcement learning with online closed-loop interaction enables an 8B open-source model to achieve comparable overall success rate to GPT-5 on the accompanying 6GAgentBench, with stronger performance on long-horizon tasks. Together, these components provide a viable path toward autonomous, closed-loop network management.
Figures & tables
| Model | Params | Success Rate (%) | SR | SPL | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| L1 | L2 | L3 | ||||
| Proprietary Models | ||||||
| GPT-5 | – | 72.4 | 51.3 | 33.8 | 50.2 | 42.7 |
| Claude-Sonnet-4 | – | 68.9 | 46.7 | 28.5 | 45.8 | 38.9 |
| Gemini-2.5-Pro | – | 65.3 | 44.2 | 30.1 | 44.1 | 37.2 |
| DeepSeek-V3 | 685B ∗ | 63.8 | 42.5 | 27.6 | 42.3 | 35.8 |
| Training Data | L1 | L2 | L3 | SR | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Baseline (no fine-tuning) | 42.1 | 24.6 | 12.8 | 24.9 | – |
| Open-loop 6G trajectories | 56.2 | 35.4 | 24.1 | 37.0 | +12.1 |
| Closed-loop synthetic only | 61.3 | 40.2 | 29.6 | 41.8 | +4.8 |
| + error recovery | 62.8 | 41.5 | 31.4 | 43.1 | +1.3 |
| + NS-3 real data (SFT) | 64.7 | 43.8 | 34.2 | 45.3 | +2.2 |
| + Agentic RL | 68.2 | 48.5 | 39.1 | 50.1 | +4.8 |
| Model | NS-3 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| GPT-5 | 50.0 | 47.5 | 2.5 | 0.94 |
| Claude-Sonnet-4 | 45.8 | 43.3 | 2.5 | 0.93 |
| Qwen3-VL-72B | 37.5 | 34.2 | 3.3 | 0.91 |
| Qwen3-VL-8B | 25.0 | 22.5 | 2.5 | 0.92 |
| 6GAgent-8B (SFT) | 45.0 | 42.5 | 2.5 | 0.93 |
| 6GAgent-8B (SFT+RL) | 50.8 | 47.5 | 3.3 | 0.92 |
Appendix figures & tables1 asset
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
| Tool Name | Input | Output |
| Observation ( , 16 tools) | ||
| read_telemetry | – | TelemetryState |
| check_network_state | – | NetworkState |
| get_signal_strength | Position | SignalStrength |
| scan_available_gnbs | Position | GnbList |
| get_edge_load | – | EdgeLoad |
AI Agent Benchmarks
AI agent benchmarks measure how reliably autonomous systems plan, use tools, interact, and complete tasks across controlled and real-world settings.
See all 1,494 papers