GRACE-DS: a Guarded Reward-guided Agent Correction Environment in Data Science

Agentic data analysis systems produce rich outputs, including code, numerical results, and verbal diagnostics. This makes them more challenging to evaluate than single-turn LLM responses. It is therefore necessary to distinguish genuine disagreement between an agent's output and a ground-truth answer from grading artifacts. We investigate how reliably automated graders assess such a system and what strategies improve grading quality by applying LAMBDA, a multi-agent data-analysis system, on 153 numerical QRData tasks from DSGym. We develop and evaluate a three-layer human-AI grading cascade: strict regex matching, LLM-based lenient grading, and snippet-based human inspection, which combines non-GenAI and GenAI strategies with different failure profiles. Both automated graders achieve 100% observed precision (0/70 false positives). The lenient grader's recall is 97% against human labels. A keyword-anchored extraction pipeline raises the strict grader's recall by 60 percentage points over a last-number heuristic; the lenient grader is architecturally parser-independent. An iterative nudge mechanism raises grading run success from 36% to 97% and lenient-pass rates from 16% to 46%; comparing nudging with and without original-question re-injection shows that re-injection offers no benefit, confirming the nudge as an answer template cue. We further observe in this case study that variable type is the task metadata field most consistently associated with grading pipeline dynamics and observed outcome grades.

Real-world data science involves long-horizon workflows that span data wrangling, exploration, modeling, visualization, and validation, and require coordinated use of tools such as notebooks, IDEs, terminals, browsers, and databases within real operating environments. Yet existing benchmarks lack real-computer interaction and do not evaluate whether agents can execute complete end-to-end data-science workflows in realistic computing environments, failing to capture the multi-stage, multi-tool nature of data-science practice. We introduce DSAgentBench, the first benchmark to evaluate whether agents can automate full data-science workflows inside real computer environments. DSAgentBench contains 275 diverse tasks covering the entire data-science life-cycle, reflecting the complexity and tool coordination required in practice. Each task requires grounding decisions in intermediate outputs and coordinated tool use, and includes a deterministic evaluator that verifies analytical correctness, visual outputs, and model performance rather than code-only execution. Our extensive experiments with 15 closed- and open-source models show that even the strongest agent, Claude-4.6-Sonnet, achieves only 56.70% task success, while all open-source agents remain below 1%, frequently failing at tool orchestration, OS grounding, and multi-step reasoning. These results reveal a substantial capability gap between current agentic systems and real data-science workflows, positioning DSAgentBench as a foundation for developing grounded, verifiable, autonomous data-science agents. We release DSAgentBench at https://github.com/vis-nlp/DSAgentBench.

Automated machine learning (AutoML) is reshaping data-driven science and industrial practice, and as large language models are introduced into AutoML, pipeline reliability becomes as important as automation efficiency. However, existing AutoML still struggles to realize instant feedback and adaptive optimization during execution, so once a run drifts into a suboptimal or failed state, it lacks a process-level correction mechanism. The fundamental pathology lies in its one-way pipeline: intermediate failures are typically terminated or bypassed, while fixed paradigms often strengthen model generation but leave ensemble decisions static, weakening both execution reliability and the controlled use of structural diversity. This indicates that LLM-driven AutoML needs a closed-loop ability for trial-correction-improvement together with evidence-based use of model diversity. To this end, we propose SAGE-Loop, a reliable closed-loop, self-adaptive, LLM-driven AutoML framework that performs multi-round generation and validation for trial-and-repair, and adaptively selects ensemble strategies in both supervised and unsupervised tasks, thereby unifying how to generate with how to use models. Across 20 public datasets, SAGE-Loop consistently improves performance and stability on classification, regression, and clustering tasks. Additional results further show its ability to recover from execution failures and maintain robust pipeline behavior.