cs.AIMay 24, 2026

ProActor: Timing-Aware Reinforcement Learning for Proactive Task Scheduling Agents

Authors: Lei DingBin HeChenguang WangYang Liu

Organizations: University of California, Santa Cruz · 2Zillow Group

Abstract

Proactive task-oriented agents must autonomously anticipate user needs, identify actionable opportunities, and trigger software actions at appropriate moments - fundamentally shifting from reactive systems that await explicit instructions. However, existing approaches lack generalizable end-to-end solutions for measuring and optimizing such anticipatory behaviors. This paper introduces ProActor, a unified framework for conversational task scheduling that integrates: (1) a domain-agnostic automated annotation methodology that enables scalable proactiveness reinforcement learning (RL) by generating full opportunity time windows instead of rigid point labels, (2) systematic proactiveness metrics capturing both timing quality and reference action alignment, and (3) RL optimization using GRPO with various reward designs. Our insight is that RULER-based rewards with proactiveness rubrics are crucial for improving timing quality, and that proactiveness optimization enabled by stage-aware composite rewards is key to balancing timing quality and reference action alignment. Timing-aware RL requires extensive exploration, demanding efficient infrastructure. We develop ART-F, an adaptive framework combining request-adaptive inference clusters with DDP-based training on single-node multi-GPU systems, enabling LoRA training of 4-bit Qwen2.5-14B-ProActor-Q4 with 4-8x speedups. Experiments on two newly auto-annotated datasets demonstrate significant improvements in proactive timing while maintaining action consistency comparable to state-of-the-art (SOTA) baselines. Ablations validate the effectiveness of distinct composite reward variations.

Explore similar work

May 25, 2026cs.CL

Anticipate and Learn: Unleashing Idle-Time Compute in Proactive Agents

While AI agents demonstrate remarkable capabilities in reasoning and tool use, they remain fundamentally reactive: they compute responses only after explicit user prompts. This paradigm ignores a critical opportunity: the idle time between interactions is largely wasted, leaving agents unable to prepare for future user needs. To bridge this gap, we introduce ProAct, a proactive agent architecture that leverages idle-time compute to anticipate and fulfill likely upcoming user needs. By analyzing evolving dialogue history together with persistent memory, ProAct predicts upcoming needs and iteratively acquires information, allowing the agent to resolve knowledge gaps and prepare evidence before the user initiates a query. To rigorously evaluate proactive capabilities, we also introduce ProActEval, a comprehensive benchmark comprising 200 scenarios across 40 domains, featuring predictable need chains and diverse user cognitive profiles. Empirical results demonstrate significant advantages over reactive baselines. ProAct accelerates task completion by reducing required turns by 14.8%, decreases user effort by 11.7%, and cuts hallucination rates by 28.1% on ProActEval. Furthermore, MemBench evaluations confirm that ProAct achieves state-of-the-art reflective accuracy, underscoring its sustained and robust performance.
Haoyi Hu, Qirong Lyu, Xianghan Kong +7
Feb 3, 2026cs.RO

ProAct: A Benchmark and Multimodal Framework for Structure-Aware Proactive Response

While passive agents merely follow instructions, proactive agents align with higher-level objectives, such as assistance and safety by continuously monitoring the environment to determine when and how to act. However, developing proactive agents is hindered by the lack of specialized resources. To address this, we introduce ProAct-75, a benchmark designed to train and evaluate proactive agents across diverse domains, including assistance, maintenance, and safety monitoring. Spanning 75 tasks, our dataset features 91,581 step-level annotations enriched with explicit task graphs. These graphs encode step dependencies and parallel execution possibilities, providing the structural grounding necessary for complex decision-making. Building on this benchmark, we propose ProAct-Helper, a reference baseline powered by a Multimodal Large Language Model (MLLM) that grounds decision-making in state detection, and leveraging task graphs to enable entropy-driven heuristic search for action selection, allowing agents to execute parallel threads independently rather than mirroring the human's next step. Extensive experiments demonstrate that ProAct-Helper outperforms strong closed-source models, improving trigger detection mF1 by 6.21%, saving 0.25 more steps in online one-step decision, and increasing the rate of parallel actions by 15.58%.
Xiaomeng Zhu, Fengming Zhu, Weijie Zhou +8
Jul 20, 2026cs.AI

ProEvent: An Event-centric Benchmark for Proactive Agents

Proactive agents are expected to anticipate user needs and provide autonomous assistance by perceiving environmental context without explicit instructions. A fundamental capability of such agents is to identify and track users' upcoming events, enabling continuous and event-specific assistance. For example, by recording the time and location of a planned hike, an agent can deliver weather reminders in advance or provide navigation support before departure. However, existing works on proactive agents largely overlook event-centric assistance, and the open-ended nature of proactive assistance poses challenges for reliable evaluation. To bridge these gaps, we introduce ProEvent, the first event-centric benchmark designed to assess an agent's ability to proactively maintain a user's timetable based on ongoing instant messaging chats. ProEvent provides synthesized yet realistic chats that consider the dynamic interaction among users, concurrent chat threads, and noise in the real world, and evaluates proactive agents on response timing, single-step response correctness, and multi-step response correctness. Experiments on eight LLMs and pipelines reveal that current agents frequently overact and struggle with event cancellation. Notably, even GPT-5.1 only reacts correctly in 26.7% of scenarios. Further qualitative analysis reveals fundamental limitations of current LLMs as proactive agents, particularly in detecting implicit events and reasoning from the user's first-person perspective.
Guanzhen Li, Liangming Pan, Leye Wang