Overview

Agent benchmarks test whether AI systems can complete tasks through sequences of decisions and actions, from web browsing and coding to desktop use, games, and professional workflows. They use simulated or real-world environments, tool-use tasks, long-horizon scenarios, and memory or multimodal challenges, with scoring based on verified outcomes, intermediate steps, costs, and reliability across repeated runs. Common approaches include executable state-based checks, trajectory review, human or rubric-based judging, and controlled comparisons of models, tools, and agent harnesses. Results show substantial gaps on complex tasks, while realism, reproducibility, verifier quality, and the influence of the harness make scores difficult to compare or generalize to deployment.

Latest papers

122 papers20 papers in the last four weeks, up 100% on the four weeks before. 0.1% of all new papers.

Feb 9, 2026

When Actions Go Off-Task: Detecting and Correcting Misaligned Actions in Computer-Use Agents

Computer-use agents (CUAs) have made tremendous progress in the past year, yet they still frequently produce misaligned actions that deviate from the user's original intent. Such misaligned actions may arise from external attacks (e.g., indirect prompt injection) or from internal limitations (e.g., erroneous reasoning). They not only expose CUAs to safety risks, but also degrade task efficiency and reliability. This work makes the first effort to define and study misaligned action detection in CUAs, with comprehensive coverage of both externally induced and internally arising misaligned actions. We further identify three common categories in real-world CUA deployment and construct MisActBench, a benchmark of realistic trajectories with human-annotated, action-level alignment labels. Moreover, we propose DeAction, a practical and universal guardrail that detects misaligned actions before execution and iteratively corrects them through structured feedback. DeAction outperforms all existing baselines across offline and online evaluations with moderate latency overhead: (1) On MisActBench, it outperforms baselines by over 15% absolute in F1 score; (2) In online evaluation, it reduces attack success rate by over 90% under adversarial settings while preserving or even improving task success rate in benign environments.
Feb 3, 2026

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%.