AI Agent Benchmarks

Follow this topic Ask about this topic

AI agent benchmarks test systems that act over multiple steps, use tools, and respond to changing information, rather than only answer isolated questions. Researchers build executable environments for settings such as web search, coding, graphical interfaces, games, scientific workflows, and multi-agent coordination, then score outcomes with programmatic checks, expert rubrics, or simulated users. Increasingly, evaluations also inspect trajectories, evidence use, efficiency, safety, and recovery from errors. Agents can perform well on narrow tasks yet remain unreliable on long-horizon work, and results often depend strongly on the model, harness, environment, and grading method.

Latest papers

1,503 papers271 papers in the last four weeks, up 91% on the four weeks before. 1.6% of all new papers.

Apr 13, 2026

CocoaBench: Evaluating Unified Digital Agents in the Wild

LLM agents now perform strongly in software engineering, deep research, GUI automation, and various other applications, while recent agent scaffolds and models are increasingly integrating these capabilities into unified systems. Yet, most evaluations still test these capabilities in isolation, which leaves a gap for more diverse use cases that require agents to combine different capabilities. We introduce CocoaBench, a benchmark for unified digital agents built from human-designed, long-horizon tasks that require flexible composition of vision, search, and coding. Tasks are specified only by an instruction and an automatic evaluation function over the final output, enabling reliable and scalable evaluation across diverse agent infrastructures. We also present CocoaAgent, a lightweight shared scaffold for controlled comparison across model backbones. Experiments show that current agents remain far from reliable on CocoaBench, with the best evaluated system achieving only 45.1% success rate. Our analysis further points to substantial room for improvement in reasoning and planning, tool use and execution, and visual grounding.

CocoaBench Team, Shibo Hao, Zhining Zhang +29

AI Agent Benchmarks Computer-Use Agent Evaluation Tool-Using Agents Long-Horizon Agent Evaluation Automated Agent Evaluation LLM Agent Planning

Apr 13, 2026

EmbodiedGovBench: A Benchmark for Governance, Recovery, and Upgrade Safety in Embodied Agent Systems

Recent progress in embodied AI has produced a growing ecosystem of robot policies, foundation models, and modular runtimes. However, current evaluation remains dominated by task success metrics such as completion rate or manipulation accuracy. These metrics leave a critical gap: they do not measure whether embodied systems are governable -- whether they respect capability boundaries, enforce policies, recover safely, maintain audit trails, and respond to human oversight. We present EmbodiedGovBench, a benchmark for governance-oriented evaluation of embodied agent systems. Rather than asking only whether a robot can complete a task, EmbodiedGovBench evaluates whether the system remains controllable, policy-bounded, recoverable, auditable, and evolution-safe under realistic perturbations. The benchmark covers seven governance dimensions: unauthorized capability invocation, runtime drift robustness, recovery success, policy portability, version upgrade safety, human override responsiveness, and audit completeness. We define a benchmark structure spanning single-robot and fleet settings, with scenario templates, perturbation operators, governance metrics, and baseline evaluation protocols. We describe how the benchmark can be instantiated over embodied capability runtimes with modular interfaces and contract-aware upgrade workflows. Our analysis suggests that embodied governance should become a first-class evaluation target. EmbodiedGovBench provides the initial measurement framework for that shift.

Xue Qin, Simin Luan, John See +2

School of Software, Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin, China · School of Computer Science and Technology, Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin, China · School of Mathematical and Computer Sciences, Heriot-Watt University, Malaysia Campus, Putrajaya, Malaysia +1

AI Agent Governance AI Agent Safety Benchmarks AI Agent Benchmarks Embodied AI

Apr 13, 2026

OccuBench: Evaluating AI Agents on Real-World Professional Tasks via Language Environment Simulation

AI agents are expected to perform professional work across hundreds of occupational domains (from emergency department triage to nuclear reactor safety monitoring to customs import processing), yet existing benchmarks can only evaluate agents in the few domains where public environments exist. We introduce OccuBench, a benchmark covering 100 real-world professional task scenarios across 10 industry categories and 65 specialized domains, enabled by Language Environment Simulators (LESs) that simulate domain-specific environments through LLM-driven tool response generation. Our multi-agent synthesis pipeline automatically produces evaluation instances with guaranteed solvability, calibrated difficulty, and document-grounded diversity. OccuBench evaluates agents along two complementary dimensions: task completion across professional domains and environmental robustness under controlled fault injection (explicit errors, implicit data degradation, and mixed faults). We evaluate 15 frontier models across 8 model families and find that: (1) no single model dominates all industries, as each has a distinct occupational capability profile; (2) implicit faults (truncated data, missing fields) are harder than both explicit errors (timeouts, 500s) and mixed faults, because they lack overt error signals and require the agent to independently detect data degradation; (3) larger models, newer generations, and higher reasoning effort consistently improve performance. GPT-5.2 improves by 27.5 points from minimal to maximum reasoning effort; and (4) strong agents are not necessarily strong environment simulators. Simulator quality is critical for LES-based evaluation reliability. OccuBench provides the first systematic cross-industry evaluation of AI agents on professional occupational tasks.

Xiaomeng Hu, Yinger Zhang, Fei Huang +7

Qwen Team, Alibaba Group · The Chinese University of Hong Kong

LLM Agent Evaluation AI Agent Benchmarks AI Agent Reliability

Apr 12, 2026

CheeseBench: Evaluating Large Language Models on Rodent Behavioral Neuroscience Paradigms

We introduce CheeseBench, a benchmark that evaluates large language models (LLMs) on nine classical behavioral neuroscience paradigms (Morris water maze, Barnes maze, T-maze, radial arm maze, star maze, operant chamber, shuttle box, conditioned place preference, and delayed non-match to sample), spanning six cognitive dimensions. Each task is grounded in peer-reviewed rodent protocols with approximate animal baselines. The agent receives a unified system prompt with no task-specific instructions and must discover goals purely from ASCII text observations and reward signals, much like a rodent placed into an unfamiliar apparatus. We evaluate six open-weight LLMs (3B to 72B parameters) on text-based ASCII renderings and compare against both a random baseline and a graph-based reinforcement learning agent. Our best model (Qwen2.5-VL-7B) reaches 52.6% average success on ASCII input, compared to 32.1% for random agents and 78.9% for approximate rodent baselines. We find that (1) scaling beyond 7B yields diminishing returns, (2) longer context history degrades performance, (3) chain-of-thought prompting hurts rather than helps, and (4) a vision-language architecture provides an advantage at 7B but hurts at 32B. Because the same model's performance ranges from 20% to 57% depending on interface parameters alone, these results characterize the agent-plus-interface system, not the model in isolation. Under this unified zero-shot ASCII protocol, current open-weight LLM agents remain well below approximate rodent reference values, particularly on tasks requiring spatial navigation and within-trial state tracking.

Zacharie Bugaud

Astera Institute

LLM Evaluation LLM Agents AI Agent Benchmarks

Apr 12, 2026

Agent^2 RL-Bench: Can LLM Agents Engineer Agentic RL Post-Training?

We introduce Agent2 RL-Bench, a compact diagnostic benchmark for evaluating agentic RL post-training, which tests whether LLM agents can autonomously design, implement, debug, and execute post-training pipelines that improve foundation models. RL post-training increasingly drives model alignment and specialization, yet existing benchmarks are largely static, rewarding supervised fine-tuning or script generation without assessing an agent's ability to close an interactive RL loop. Agent2 RL-Bench provides a unified agent-facing interface: each run starts from an isolated workspace containing a base model, task data, instructions, and a grading API, and agents must iterate within a fixed budget by training models and submitting artifacts for evaluation. The benchmark spans six tasks across three levels, from static rule-based training to judge-based optimization and closed-loop online RL with trajectory collection. Two diagnostic skills, namely runtime recording and post-hoc summarization, enable structured analysis of agent behavior, facilitating smooth and effective iteration of the benchmark's evaluation framework. Across five agent systems and six driver LLMs, agents show intelligent behavior but clear limitations: one RL-oriented run improves ALFWorld from 4.85 to 93.28 via SFT warm-up and GRPO with online rollouts, yet DeepSearchQA remains difficult, most successful routes rely on supervised pipelines, and interactive outcomes show large single-run differences across agent stacks. Overall, Agent2 RL-Bench shows that current agents can sometimes engineer online RL, but stable agent-driven RL post-training remains rare under fixed budgets. It also demonstrates that our benchmark provides a strong and effective evaluation framework for future research in this direction. Code is available at https://github.com/microsoft/RD-Agent/blob/main/rdagent/scenarios/rl/autorl_bench/README.md

Wanyi Chen, Xiao Yang, Xu Yang +7

Soochow University · Microsoft Research Asia · Stony Brook University +2

Agentic RL AI Agent Benchmarks LLM Post-Training LLM Agent Evaluation

Apr 11, 2026

The Amazing Agent Race: Strong Tool Users, Weak Navigators

Existing tool-use benchmarks for LLM agents are overwhelmingly linear: our analysis of six benchmarks shows 55 to 100% of instances are simple chains of 2 to 5 steps. We introduce The Amazing Agent Race (AAR), a benchmark featuring directed acyclic graph (DAG) puzzles (or "legs") with fork-merge tool chains. We release 1,400 instances across two variants: sequential (800 legs) and compositional (600 DAG legs). Agents must navigate Wikipedia, execute multi-step tool chains, and aggregate results into a verifiable answer. Legs are procedurally generated from Wikipedia seeds across four difficulty levels with live-API validation. Three complementary metrics (finish-line accuracy, pit-stop visit rate, and roadblock completion rate) separately diagnose navigation, tool-use, and arithmetic failures. Evaluating three agent frameworks on 1,400 legs, the best achieves only 37.2% accuracy. Navigation errors dominate (27 to 52% of trials) while tool-use errors remain below 17%, and agent architecture matters as much as model scale (Claude Code matches Codex CLI at 37% with 6x fewer tokens). The compositional structure of AAR reveals that agents fail not at calling tools but at navigating to the right pages, a blind spot invisible to linear benchmarks. The project page can be accessed at: https://minnesotanlp.github.io/the-amazing-agent-race

Zae Myung Kim, Dongseok Lee, Jaehyung Kim +2

University of Minnesota Twin Cities · Yonsei University · Grammarly

LLM Agent Evaluation AI Agent Benchmarks Tool-Using Agents LLM Agents

Apr 11, 2026

Credit-Budgeted ICPC-Style Coding: When Agents Must Pay for Every Decision

Current evaluations of autonomous coding agents assume an unrealistic, infinite-resource environment. However, real-world software engineering is a resource-bound competition. As we scale toward large agent swarms, ignoring compute and time costs risks catastrophic budget exhaustion. To shift the focus from isolated accuracy to cost-aware problem-solving, we introduce USACOArena, an interactive ACM-ICPC-style arena driven by a strict "credit" economy. Every generated token, local test, and elapsed second depletes a fixed budget, forcing agents to make strategic trade-offs. Our comprehensive profiling reveals that frontier single agents and swarms currently fail to optimally balance accuracy with these constraints, exhibiting divergent, path-dependent behaviors. Ultimately, USACOArena provides an essential dynamic training ground for developing highly efficient, resource-aware agent architectures.

Lingfeng Zhou, Junhao Shi, Jin Gao +1

Shanghai Jiao Tong University · Shanghai Innovation Institute

Software Engineering Agents AI Agent Benchmarks Multi-Agent Coding LLM Agent Planning

Apr 10, 2026

COMPOSITE-Stem

AI agents hold growing promise for accelerating scientific discovery; yet, a lack of frontier evaluations hinders adoption into real workflows. Expert-written benchmarks have proven effective at measuring AI reasoning, but most at this stage have become saturated and only measure performance on constrained outputs. To help address this gap, we introduce COMPOSITE-STEM, a benchmark of 70 expert-written tasks in physics, biology, chemistry, and mathematics, curated by doctoral-level researchers. Our benchmark combines exact-match grading and criterion-based rubrics with an LLM-as-a-jury grading protocol, allowing more flexible assessment of scientifically meaningful outputs. Using an adapted multimodal Terminus-2 agent harness within the Harbor agentic evaluation framework, we evaluate four frontier models. The top-performing model achieves 21%, demonstrating that COMPOSITE-STEM captures capabilities beyond current agent reach. All tasks are open-sourced with contributor permission to support reproducibility and to promote additional research towards AI's acceleration of scientific progress in these domains.

Kyle Waters, Lucas Nuzzi, Tadhg Looram +20

PortexAI · University of Milano-Bicocca · University of Calgary +17

Scientific Agent Benchmarks AI Agent Benchmarks AI Agent Evaluation AI for Science

Apr 10, 2026

NetForge RL: A Multi-Agent Simulation Environment for Cyber Defense with Durative Actions

Training reinforcement-learning agents for cyber defense requires an environment that reflects the operational setting: noisy, partial observations, several defenders coordinating across a network, and an adaptive adversary realized through self-play. We present NetForge RL, a multi-agent environment for this setting on procedurally generated enterprise and operational-technology (OT) networks. A red agent compromises hosts with partial observability; three zone-split blue agents defend from synthetic SIEM telemetry, Windows/Sysmon event logs encoded into dense embeddings rather than a ground-truth state vector. The environment follows the PettingZoo parallel API with fixed-shape observations and MITRE ATT&CK-mapped actions, ships five scenarios with named difficulty presets and a held-out evaluation split, and replays deterministically under a seed. A JAX backend vectorizes a reduced transition core, reaching 2.5 x 10^5 environment-steps/s at batch 4096 on CPU, as a fast surrogate for training-loop iteration. Alongside the environment we provide reference baselines (scripted, a JAX IPPO trainer, and a self-play tournament), six diagnostic probes that each measure one defensive skill, and an evaluation runner reporting 95% confidence intervals. We describe the reproducibility engineering behind the environment and include a responsible-use statement.

Igor Jankowski

Autonomous Cyber Defense Cybersecurity AI Agent Benchmarks Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning

Apr 10, 2026

HiL-Bench (Human-in-Loop Benchmark): Do Agents Know When to Ask for Help?

Frontier coding agents solve complex tasks when given complete context but collapse when specifications are incomplete or ambiguous. The bottleneck is not raw capability, but judgment: knowing when to act autonomously and when to ask for help. Current benchmarks are blind to this failure mode. They supply unambiguous detailed instructions and solely reward execution correctness, so an agent that makes a lucky guess for a missing requirement will score identically to one that would have asked to be certain. We present HiL-Bench (Human-in-the-Loop Benchmark) to measure this selective escalation skill. Each task contains human-validated blockers (missing information, ambiguous requests, contradictory information) that surface only through progressive exploration, not upfront inspection. Our core metric, Ask-F1, the harmonic mean of question precision and blocker recall, captures the tension between over-asking and silent guessing; its structure architecturally prevents gaming through question spam. Evaluation across SWE and text-to-SQL domains reveals a large universal judgment gap: no frontier model recovers more than a fraction of its full-information performance when deciding whether to ask. Failure analysis identifies three key help-seeking patterns: overconfident wrong beliefs with no gap detection; high uncertainty detection yet persistent errors; broad, imprecise escalation without self-correction. These consistent patterns confirm poor help-seeking is a model-level flaw, not task-specific. RL training on shaped Ask-F1 reward shows judgment is trainable: a 32B model improves both help-seeking quality and task pass rate, with gains that transfer across domains. The model does not learn domain-specific heuristics for when to ask; it learns to detect unresolvable uncertainty and act on it.

Tu Trinh, Mohamed Elfeki, Guangze Luo +9

LLM Agents AI Agent Benchmarks Human-in-the-Loop Evaluation Software Engineering Agents

Apr 10, 2026

Mind the Gap Between Spatial Reasoning and Acting! Step-by-Step Evaluation of Agents With Spatial-Gym

Spatial reasoning is central to navigation and robotics, yet measuring model capabilities on these tasks remains difficult. Existing benchmarks evaluate models in a one-shot setting, requiring full solution generation in a single response, unlike humans, who work in interactive environments step-by-step. We introduce Spatial-Gym, a Gymnasium environment that isolates spatial constraint reasoning by testing pathfinding in 2D-grid puzzles as a sequential decision task with optional backtracking. We evaluate eight models in three settings (one-shot, step-by-step, step-by-step with backtracking) against human, random, and A* baselines on 500 episodes. The best model, GPT-OSS 120B, achieves a solve rate of 16.0%, 82 points below the human baseline (98.0%). Step-by-step format helps weaker models (up to +5.4%) by removing formatting errors, but hurts stronger models (up to 5.6%) by constraining global planning. Backtracking improves episode completion, but increases solve rate only for weaker models; stronger models rarely backtrack and do not benefit from it. Our experiments have three key findings: (1) models fail to scale reasoning effort with difficulty, (2) vision models receiving images of the spatial environment reduce solve rate by 73%, and (3) extended chain-of-thought reasoning retains a 3-5x accuracy advantage over standard inference even in the step-by-step setting. Spatial-Gym enables diagnosis of model limitations and provides a framework for improving spatial reasoning through reinforcement learning.

Lars Benedikt Kaesberg, Tianyu Yang, Niklas Bauer +3

University of Göttingen, Germany

Spatial Reasoning Benchmarks Spatial Reasoning AI Agent Benchmarks Visual Spatial Reasoning

Apr 10, 2026

SAGE: A Service Agent Graph-guided Evaluation Benchmark

The development of Large Language Models (LLMs) has catalyzed automation in customer service, yet benchmarking their performance remains challenging. Existing benchmarks predominantly rely on static paradigms and single-dimensional metrics, failing to account for diverse user behaviors or the strict adherence to structured Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) required in real-world deployments. To bridge this gap, we propose SAGE (Service Agent Graph-guided Evaluation), a universal multi-agent benchmark for automated, dual-axis assessment. SAGE formalizes unstructured SOPs into Dynamic Dialogue Graphs, enabling precise verification of logical compliance and comprehensive path coverage. We introduce an Adversarial Intent Taxonomy and a modular Extension Mechanism, enabling low-cost deployment across domains and facilitating automated dialogue data synthesis. Evaluation is conducted via a framework where Judge Agents and a Rule Engine analyze interactions between User and Service Agents to generate deterministic ground truth. Extensive experiments on 27 LLMs across 6 industrial scenarios reveal a significant Execution Gap'' where models accurately classify intents but fail to derive correct subsequent actions. We also observe Empathy Resilience'', a phenomenon where models maintain polite conversational facades despite underlying logical failures under high adversarial intensity. Code and resources are available at https://anonymous.4open.science/r/SAGE-Bench-4CD3/.

Ling Shi, Yuqin Dai, Ziyin Wang +7

Tianjin University, Tianjin, China · Tsinghua University, Beijing, China · Beihang University, Beijing, China +3

LLM Agent Evaluation Agent Evaluation AI Agent Benchmarks Customer Support Automation

Apr 10, 2026

DRBENCHER: Can Your Agent Identify the Entity, Retrieve Its Properties and Do the Math?

Deep research agents increasingly interleave web browsing with multi-step computation, yet existing benchmarks evaluate these capabilities in isolation, creating a blind spot in assessing real-world performance. We introduce DRBENCHER, a synthetic benchmark generator for questions that require both browsing and computation, synthesized answer-first from knowledge-graph chains with no seed passages or provenance text. It enforces four criteria: verifiability (gold answers are computed by executing parameterized code over knowledge-graph values), complexity (multi-hop entity identification, property retrieval, and domain-specific computation), difficulty (a two-stage verification cascade filters out questions solvable by the generating model), and diversity (a greedy max-min embedding filter maximizes coverage). These criteria are realized via a unified answer-first pipeline spanning five domains: biochemistry, financial, geophysical, security, and history. Human evaluation shows 76% validity, with 35% of errors due to outdated knowledge-graph entries, highlighting an inherent limitation of systems that reason over evolving data. Automatic evaluation shows that the strongest frontier model achieves only 20% answer accuracy. Compared to manually constructed benchmarks (BrowseComp+, MATH-500, GPQA), DRBENCHER achieves the highest semantic diversity. We release DrBencher pipeline and the human-verified benchmark data at https://github.com/IBM/DrBencher.

Young-Suk Lee, Ramon Fernandez Astudillo, Radu Florian

IBM Research

AI Agent Benchmarks Scientific Agent Benchmarks LLM Agent Evaluation Synthetic Benchmark Generation Knowledge Graph Question Answering

Apr 10, 2026

SEA-Eval: A Benchmark for Evaluating Self-Evolving Agents Beyond Episodic Assessment

Current LLM-based agents demonstrate strong performance in episodic task execution but remain constrained by static toolsets and episodic amnesia, failing to accumulate experience across task boundaries. This paper formalizes the Self-Evolving Agent (SEA) from the perspective of digital embodiment and continuous cross-task evolution, introduces the Evolutionary Flywheel as its minimal sufficient architecture, and presents SEA-Eval -- the first benchmark designed specifically for evaluating SEAs. Grounded in Flywheel theory, SEA-Eval establishes SR and T as primary metrics and, through sequential task stream design, is designed to quantify evolutionary gain, evolutionary stability, and implicit alignment convergence. Empirical evaluation reveals that, under comparable success rates, token consumption differs by up to 31.2 times between frameworks on individual tasks, with divergent evolutionary trajectories emerging under sequential analysis -- demonstrating that success rate alone creates a capability illusion and that the sequential convergence of

T

is the key criterion for distinguishing genuine evolution from pseudo-evolution.

Sihang Jiang, Lipeng Ma, Zhonghua Hong +9

Fudan University

Self-Evolving Agents AI Agent Benchmarks Long-Horizon Agent Evaluation

Apr 9, 2026

ParseBench: A Document Parsing Benchmark for AI Agents

AI agents are changing the requirements for document parsing. What matters is semantic correctness: parsed output must preserve the structure and meaning needed for autonomous decisions, including correct table structure, precise chart data, semantically meaningful formatting, and visual grounding. Existing benchmarks do not fully capture this setting for enterprise automation, relying on narrow document distributions and text-similarity metrics that miss agent-critical failures. We introduce ParseBench, a benchmark of

{\sim}2{,}000

human-verified pages from enterprise documents spanning insurance, finance, and government, organized around five capability dimensions: tables, charts, content faithfulness, semantic formatting, and visual grounding. Across 14 methods spanning vision-language models, specialized document parsers, and LlamaParse, the benchmark reveals a fragmented capability landscape: no method is consistently strong across all five dimensions. LlamaParse Agentic achieves the highest overall score at 84.9%, and the benchmark highlights the remaining capability gaps across current systems. Dataset and evaluation code are available on https://huggingface.co/datasets/llamaindex/ParseBench and https://github.com/run-llama/ParseBench.

Boyang Zhang, Sebastián G. Acosta, Preston Carlson +4

Document Parsing Benchmarks Document Parsing Document Information Extraction AI Agent Benchmarks Visual Grounding

Apr 9, 2026

ClawBench: Can AI Agents Complete Everyday Online Tasks?

AI agents may be able to assist with emails and documents, but can they reliably complete everyday online workflows on real websites? Everyday online tasks offer a realistic yet unsolved testbed for evaluating the next generation of AI agents. To this end, we introduce ClawBench, an evaluation framework comprising 153 everyday online tasks that people need to accomplish regularly in their lives and work, spanning 144 platforms across 15 categories, from completing purchases and booking appointments to submitting job applications. These tasks require capabilities beyond existing benchmarks, such as obtaining relevant information from user-provided documents, navigating multi-step workflows across diverse platforms, and write-heavy operations like filling in many detailed forms correctly. Unlike existing benchmarks that evaluate agents in offline sandboxes with static pages, ClawBench operates on production websites, preserving the full complexity, dynamic nature, and interaction challenges of real-world web environments. An interception layer captures and blocks the final submission request, ensuring safe evaluation without real-world side effects. Our evaluations of 8 frontier models show that both proprietary and open-source models complete only a small portion of these tasks. For example, Claude Sonnet 4.6 achieves only 33.3%, which exposes gaps in current AI agents. Progress on ClawBench brings us closer to AI agents that can function as general-purpose assistants.

Yuxuan Zhang, Yubo Wang, Yipeng Zhu +25

University of British Columbia · Vector Institute · Etude AI +9

Web Agent Benchmarks AI Agent Evaluation AI Agent Benchmarks Web Agents

Apr 9, 2026

KnowU-Bench: Towards Interactive, Proactive, and Personalized Mobile Agent Evaluation

Personalized mobile agents that infer user preferences and calibrate proactive assistance hold great promise as everyday digital assistants, yet existing benchmarks fail to capture what this requires. Prior work evaluates preference recovery from static histories or intent prediction from fixed contexts. Neither tests whether an agent can elicit missing preferences through interaction, nor whether it can decide when to intervene, seek consent, or remain silent in a live GUI environment. We introduce KnowU-Bench, an online benchmark for personalized mobile agents built on a reproducible Android emulation environment, covering 42 general GUI tasks, 86 personalized tasks, and 64 proactive tasks. Unlike prior work that treats user preferences as static context, KnowU-Bench hides the user profile from the agent and exposes only behavioral logs, forcing genuine preference inference rather than context lookup. To support multi-turn preference elicitation, it instantiates an LLM-driven user simulator grounded in structured profiles, enabling realistic clarification dialogues and proactive consent handling. Beyond personalization, KnowU-Bench provides comprehensive evaluation of the complete proactive decision chain, including grounded GUI execution, consent negotiation, and post-rejection restraint, evaluated through a hybrid protocol combining rule-based verification with LLM-as-a-Judge scoring. Our experiments reveal a striking degradation: agents that excel at explicit task execution fall below 50% under vague instructions requiring user preference inference or intervention calibration, even for frontier models like Claude Sonnet 4.6. The core bottlenecks are not GUI navigation but preference acquisition and intervention calibration, exposing a fundamental gap between competent interface operation and trustworthy personal assistance.

Tongbo Chen, Zhengxi Lu, Zhan Xu +13

Zhejiang University · Apple · Tencent

Mobile Agent Benchmarks AI Agent Benchmarks Proactive Assistance Mobile GUI Agents Preference Elicitation User Preference Modeling

Apr 9, 2026

Mastering PokeGym: Graph-Guided Multimodal Evolution at Test Time

While artificial intelligence has mastered structured games like chess and Go, vision-language agents still struggle in visually-driven 3D games without access to game states. Existing game environments typically evaluate a fixed agent configuration, rather than an agent's ability to improve its configuration across consecutive episodes of the same task---a paradigm known as test-time learning (TTL). Furthermore, current TTL methods typically optimize single modalities---such as text prompts or actions---in isolation, ignoring the synergy between perception, reasoning, and control. To bridge these gaps, we first introduce PokeGym, a long-horizon benchmark built upon the 3D open-world game Pokémon Legends: Z-A, where agents act from visual observations without access to game states, designed to evaluate an agent's ability to learn and adapt across consecutive episodes of the task. To tackle this challenging environment, we propose Graph-Guided Evolutionary Multimodal Agent Configuration (G-EvoMAC), a graph-guided framework that jointly optimizes visual perception, strategy, and action set synergistically. Extensive experiments show that G-EvoMAC achieves a 60.18% average success rate on PokeGym, outperforming the strongest baseline by over 11 percentage points, validating the power of cross-modal co-evolution.

Ruizhi Zhang, Ye Huang, Yuangang Pan +5

Shenzhen Institute for Advanced Study, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China · A*STAR · College of Computer Science and Software Engineering, Shenzhen University

Game-Playing Agents Multimodal Agents AI Agent Benchmarks Self-Evolving Agents Long-Horizon Agent Evaluation Evolutionary Optimization

Apr 9, 2026

Aligning Agents via Planning: A Benchmark for Trajectory-Level Reward Modeling

In classical Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF), Reward Models (RMs) serve as the fundamental signal provider for model alignment. As Large Language Models evolve into agentic systems capable of autonomous tool invocation and complex reasoning, the paradigm of reward modeling faces unprecedented challenges -- most notably, the lack of benchmarks specifically designed to assess RM capabilities within tool-integrated environments. To address this gap, we present Plan-RewardBench, a trajectory-level preference benchmark designed to evaluate how well judges distinguish preferred versus distractor agent trajectories in complex tool-using scenarios. Plan-RewardBench covers four representative task families -- (i) Safety Refusal, (ii) Tool-Irrelevance / Unavailability, (iii) Complex Planning, and (iv) Robust Error Recovery -- comprising validated positive trajectories and confusable hard negatives constructed via multi-model natural rollouts, rule-based perturbations, and minimal-edit LLM perturbations. We benchmark representative RMs (generative, discriminative, and LLM-as-Judge) under a unified pairwise protocol, reporting accuracy trends across varying trajectory lengths and task categories. Furthermore, we provide diagnostic analyses of prevalent failure modes. Our results reveal that all three evaluator families face substantial challenges, with performance degrading sharply on long-horizon trajectories, underscoring the necessity for specialized training in agentic, trajectory-level reward modeling. Ultimately, Plan-RewardBench aims to serve as both a practical evaluation suite and a reusable blueprint for constructing agentic planning preference data.

Jiaxuan Wang, Yulan Hu, Wenjin Yang +3

State Key Laboratory of Novel Software Technology, Nanjing University · School of Intelligence Science and Technology, Nanjing University · AMAP, Alibaba Group

Reward Model Evaluation AI Agent Benchmarks Long-Horizon Agent Evaluation

Apr 9, 2026

CivBench: Progress-Based Evaluation for LLMs' Strategic Decision-Making in Civilization V

Evaluating strategic decision-making in LLM-based agents requires generative, competitive, and longitudinal environments, yet few benchmarks provide all three, and fewer still offer evaluation signals rich enough for long-horizon, multi-agent play. We introduce CivBench, a benchmark for LLM strategists (a model under an agentic setup) in multiplayer Civilization V. Because terminal win/loss is too sparse a signal in games spanning hundreds of turns and multiple opponents, CivBench trains estimators of a state-value function, the probability that a player eventually wins given the game state. cross 307 games with 7 LLMs and multiple CivBench agent conditions, we demonstrate CivBench's potential to estimate strategic capabilities in Civilization V as an unsaturated benchmark, reveal model-specific effects of agentic setup, and outline distinct strategic profiles not visible through outcome-only evaluation.

John Chen, Sihan Cheng, Can Gurkan +1

Northwestern University

LLM Agent Evaluation AI Agent Benchmarks Game-Playing Agents Long-Horizon Agent Evaluation

Apr 9, 2026

Towards Knowledgeable Deep Research: Framework and Benchmark

Deep Research (DR) requires LLM agents to autonomously perform multi-step information seeking, processing, and reasoning to generate comprehensive reports. In contrast to existing studies that mainly focus on unstructured web content, a more challenging DR task should additionally utilize structured knowledge to provide a solid data foundation, facilitate quantitative computation, and lead to in-depth analyses. In this paper, we refer to this novel task as Knowledgeable Deep Research (KDR), which requires DR agents to generate reports with both structured and unstructured knowledge. Furthermore, we propose the Hybrid Knowledge Analysis framework (HKA), a multi-agent architecture that reasons over both kinds of knowledge and integrates the texts, figures, and tables into coherent multimodal reports. The key design is the Structured Knowledge Analyzer, which utilizes both coding and vision-language models to produce figures, tables, and corresponding insights. To support systematic evaluation, we construct KDR-Bench, which covers 9 domains, includes 41 expert-level questions, and incorporates a large number of structured knowledge resources (e.g., 1,252 tables). We further annotate the main conclusions and key points for each question and propose three categories of evaluation metrics including general-purpose, knowledge-centric, and vision-enhanced ones. Experimental results demonstrate that HKA consistently outperforms most existing DR agents on general-purpose and knowledge-centric metrics, and even surpasses the Gemini DR agent on vision-enhanced metrics, highlighting its effectiveness in deep, structure-aware knowledge analysis. Finally, we hope this work can serve as a new foundation for structured knowledge analysis in DR agents and facilitate future multimodal DR studies.

Wenxuan Liu, Zixuan Li, Long Bai +13

State Key Laboratory of AI Safety, Institute of Computing Technology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China · Also with University of Chinese Academy of Sciences. · National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore

Deep Research Agents AI Agent Benchmarks Multi-Agent LLM Systems Multimodal Agents

Apr 8, 2026

GameWorld: Towards Standardized and Verifiable Evaluation of Multimodal Game Agents

Towards an embodied generalist for real-world interaction, Multimodal Large Language Model (MLLM) agents still suffer from challenging latency, sparse feedback, and irreversible mistakes. Video games offer an ideal testbed with rich visual observations and closed-loop interaction, demanding fine-grained perception, long-horizon planning, and precise control. However, systematically evaluating these capabilities is currently hindered by heterogeneous action interfaces and heuristic verification. To this end, we introduce GameWorld, a benchmark designed for standardized and verifiable evaluation of MLLMs as generalist game agents in browser environments. Two game agent interfaces are studied: (i) computer-use agents that directly emit keyboard and mouse controls, and (ii) generalist multimodal agents that act in a semantic action space via deterministic Semantic Action Parsing. GameWorld contains 34 diverse games and 170 tasks, each paired with state-verifiable metrics for outcome-based evaluation. The results across 18 model-interface pairs suggest that even the best performing agent is far from achieving human capabilities on video games. Extensive experiments of repeated full-benchmark reruns demonstrate the robustness of the benchmark, while further studies on real-time interaction, context-memory sensitivity, and action validity expose more challenges ahead for game agents. Together, by offering a standardized, verifiable, and reproducible evaluation framework, GameWorld lays a robust foundation for advancing research on multimodal game agents and beyond. The project page is at https://gameworld-bench.github.io.

Mingyu Ouyang, Siyuan Hu, Kevin Qinghong Lin +2

National University of Singapore · University of Oxford

AI Agent Evaluation AI Agent Benchmarks Multimodal Agents Game-Playing Agents

Apr 8, 2026

$k$ -server-bench: Automating Potential Discovery for the $k$ -Server Conjecture

We introduce a code-based challenge for automated, open-ended mathematical discovery based on the

k

-server conjecture, a central open problem in competitive analysis. The task is to discover a potential function satisfying a large graph-structured system of simple linear inequalities. The resulting evaluation procedure is sound but incomplete: any violated inequality definitively refutes a candidate, whereas satisfying all inequalities does not by itself constitute a proof of the corresponding conjecture's special case. Nevertheless, a candidate that passes all constraints would be strong evidence toward a valid proof and, to the best of our knowledge, no currently known potential achieves this under our formulation in the open

k=4

circle case. As such, a successful candidate would already be an interesting contribution to the

k

-server conjecture, and could become a substantial theoretical result when paired with a full proof. Experiments on the resolved

k=3

regime show that current agentic methods can solve nontrivial instances, and in the open

k=4

regime they reduce the number of violations relative to existing potentials without fully resolving the task. Taken together, these results suggest that the task is challenging but plausibly within reach of current methods. Beyond its relevance to the

k

-server community, where the developed tooling enables researchers to test new hypotheses and potentially improve on the current record, the task also serves as a useful benchmark for developing code-based discovery agents. In particular, our

k=3

results show that it mitigates important limitations of existing open-ended code-based benchmarks, including early saturation and the weak separation between naive random baselines and more sophisticated methods.

Kirill Brilliantov, Etienne Bamas, Emmanuel Abbé

MDS Lab, EPFL

AI-Assisted Mathematical Discovery Autonomous Scientific Discovery AI Agent Benchmarks Benchmark Design Competitive Analysis Online Resource Allocation

Apr 8, 2026

EmoMAS: Emotion-Aware Multi-Agent System for High-Stakes Edge-Deployable Negotiation with Bayesian Orchestration

Large language models (LLMs) has been widely used for automated negotiation, but their high computational cost and privacy risks limit deployment in privacy-sensitive, on-device settings such as mobile assistants or rescue robots. Small language models (SLMs) offer a viable alternative, yet struggle with the complex emotional dynamics of high-stakes negotiation. We introduces EmoMAS, a Bayesian multi-agent framework that transforms emotional decision-making from reactive to strategic. EmoMAS leverages a Bayesian orchestrator to coordinate three specialized agents: game-theoretic, reinforcement learning, and psychological coherence models. The system fuses their real-time insights to optimize emotional state transitions while continuously updating agent reliability based on negotiation feedback. This mixture-of-agents architecture enables online strategy learning without pre-training. We further introduce four high-stakes, edge-deployable negotiation benchmarks across debt, healthcare, emergency response, and educational domains. Through extensive agent-to-agent simulations across all benchmarks, both SLMs and LLMs equipped with EmoMAS consistently surpass all baseline models in negotiation performance while balancing ethical behavior. These results show that strategic emotional intelligence is also the key driver of negotiation success. By treating emotional expression as a strategic variable within a Bayesian multi-agent optimization framework, EmoMAS establishes a new paradigm for effective, private, and adaptive negotiation AI suitable for high-stakes edge deployment.

Yunbo Long, Yuhan Liu, Liming Xu

University of Cambridge, UK · University of Toronto, Canada

Multi-Agent Negotiation Automated Negotiation Multi-Agent LLM Systems Multi-Agent Orchestration AI Agent Benchmarks

Apr 8, 2026

Riemann-Bench: A Benchmark for Moonshot Mathematics

Recent AI systems have achieved gold-medal-level performance on the International Mathematical Olympiad, demonstrating remarkable proficiency at competition-style problem solving. However, competition mathematics represents only a narrow slice of mathematical reasoning: problems are drawn from limited domains, require minimal advanced machinery, and can often reward insightful tricks over deep theoretical knowledge. We introduce Riemann-Bench, a private benchmark of expert-curated problems designed to evaluate AI systems on research-level mathematics that goes far beyond the olympiad frontier. Problems are authored by Ivy League mathematics professors, graduate students, and PhD-holding IMO medalists, and routinely took their authors weeks to solve independently. Each problem undergoes double-blind verification by two independent domain experts who must solve the problem from scratch, and yields a unique, closed-form solution assessed by programmatic verifiers. We evaluate frontier models as unconstrained research agents, with full access to coding tools, search, and open-ended reasoning, using an unbiased statistical estimator computed over 100 independent runs per problem. Our results reveal that all frontier models currently score below 10%, exposing a substantial gap between olympiad-level problem solving and genuine research-level mathematical reasoning. By keeping the benchmark fully private, we ensure that measured performance reflects authentic mathematical capability rather than memorization of training data.

Suhaas Garre, Erik Knutsen, Sushant Mehta +1

Surge AI

Mathematical Reasoning Benchmarks Benchmark Design AI Agent Benchmarks LLM Mathematical Reasoning

Apr 8, 2026

ATANT: An Evaluation Framework for AI Continuity

We present ATANT (Automated Test for Acceptance of Narrative Truth), an open evaluation framework for measuring continuity in AI systems: the ability to persist, update, disambiguate, and reconstruct meaningful context across time. While the AI industry has produced memory components (RAG pipelines, vector databases, long context windows, profile layers), no published framework formally defines or measures whether these components produce genuine continuity. We define continuity as a system property with 7 required properties, introduce a 10-checkpoint evaluation methodology that operates without an LLM in the evaluation loop, and present a narrative test corpus of 250 stories comprising 1,835 verification questions across 6 life domains. We evaluate a reference implementation across 5 test suite iterations, progressing from 58% (legacy architecture) to 100% in isolated mode (250 stories) and 100% in 50-story cumulative mode, with 96% at 250-story cumulative scale. The cumulative result is the primary measure: when 250 distinct life narratives coexist in the same database, the system must retrieve the correct fact for the correct context without cross-contamination. ATANT is system-agnostic, model-independent, and designed as a sequenced methodology for building and validating continuity systems. The framework specification, example stories, and evaluation protocol are available at https://github.com/Kenotic-Labs/ATANT. The full 250-story corpus will be released incrementally.

Samuel Sameer Tanguturi

Kenotic Labs

LLM Memory AI Agent Evaluation AI Agent Benchmarks

Apr 7, 2026

RealUserSim: Bridging the Reality Gap in Agent Benchmarking via Grounded User Simulation

LLM-based user simulation is the primary mechanism for end-to-end agent evaluation, yet simulated users are poor proxies for real humans: unconstrained LLM defaults produce a Formalism Ceiling (style match rates of 6-8% against real users), while hand-crafted behavioral directives trigger Directive Amplification, where models hyper-interpret instructions into unnatural behavioral extremes that vary dramatically across simulator models. We present RealUserSim, the first user simulation framework grounded in real behavioral data. From 14,000+ authentic human-LLM conversations (WildChat), we extract 7,275 executable behavioral profiles and use them to ground LLM simulators. A fidelity benchmark (PT3) on 600 conversations across 71+ domains with anti-leakage controls shows that grounded simulation raises match rate from 24.2% to 45.3% across five behavioral dimensions. Agent evaluation on TauBench with 6 simulator models and extensive analysis shows that grounded simulation acts as a realistic stress test, surfacing three failure mechanisms invisible to cooperative simulators (mean -3.2% to -3.5% task success degradation), while Directive Amplification in existing benchmarks produces unrealistic behavior that compromises the validity of agent evaluation.

Ming Zhu, Juntao Tan, Rithesh Murthy +6

Salesforce AI Research

User Simulation Human Behavior Simulation LLM Agent Evaluation AI Agent Benchmarks

Apr 7, 2026

Claw-Eval: Towards Trustworthy Evaluation of Autonomous Agents

Large language models are increasingly deployed as autonomous agents for multi-step workflows in real-world software environments. However, existing agent benchmarks are limited by trajectory-opaque grading, underspecified safety and robustness evaluation, and narrow coverage of modalities and interaction paradigms. We introduce Claw-Eval, an end-to-end evaluation suite addressing these gaps with 300 human-verified tasks spanning 9 categories across three groups: general service orchestration, multimodal perception and interaction, and multi-turn professional dialogue. To enable trajectory-aware grading, each run is recorded through three independent evidence channels: execution traces, audit logs, and environment snapshots, yielding 2,159 fine-grained rubric items. The scoring protocol evaluates Completion, Safety, and Robustness, with Average Score, Pass@k, and Pass^k across three trials to distinguish genuine capability from lucky outcomes. Experiments on 14 frontier models show that: (1) Trajectory-opaque evaluation is systematically unreliable, missing 44% of safety violations and 13% of robustness failures detected by our framework. (2) Capability does not imply consistency, with Pass@3 remaining stable under error injection while Pass^3 dropping by up to 24 percentage points. (3) Agent capability is strongly multi-dimensional, with model rankings varying across task groups and metrics, indicating that our heterogeneous evaluation coverage is essential. Claw-Eval highlights directions for developing agents that are not only capable but reliably deployable.

Bowen Ye, Rang Li, Qibin Yang +10

State Key Laboratory of Multimedia Information Processing, School of Computer Science, Peking University · The University of Hong Kong

AI Agent Evaluation AI Agent Benchmarks AI Agent Reliability AI Agent Safety Benchmarks

Apr 7, 2026

AgentCE-Bench: Agent Configurable Evaluation with Scalable Horizons and Controllable Difficulty under Lightweight Environments

Existing Agent benchmarks suffer from two critical limitations: high environment interaction overhead (up to 41% of total evaluation time) and imbalanced task horizon and difficulty distributions that make aggregate scores unreliable. To address these issues, we propose AgentCE-Bench built around a unified grid-based planning task, where agents must fill hidden slots in a partially completed schedule subject to both local slot constraints and global constraints. Our benchmark offers fine-grained control through two orthogonal axes: Scalable Horizons, controlled by the number of hidden slots

H

, and Controllable Difficulty, governed by a decoy budget

B

that determines the number of globally misleading decoy candidates. Crucially, all tool calls are resolved via static JSON files under a Lightweight Environment design, eliminating setup overhead and enabling fast, reproducible evaluation suitable for training-time validation. We first validate that

H

and

B

provide reliable control over task horizon and difficulty, and that AgentCE-Bench exhibits strong domain consistency and model discriminability. We then conduct comprehensive experiments across 13 models of diverse sizes and families over 6 domains, revealing significant cross-model performance variation and confirming that AgentCE-Bench provides interpretable and controllable evaluation of agent reasoning.

Wang Yang, Chaoda Song, Xinpeng Li +7

Case Western Reserve University · NII LLMC (Japan) · University of Zurich

AI Agent Benchmarks Agent Benchmarks Long-Horizon Agent Evaluation LLM Agent Planning

Apr 7, 2026

FrontierFinance: A Long-Horizon Computer-Use Benchmark of Real-World Financial Tasks

As concerns surrounding AI-driven labor displacement intensify in knowledge-intensive sectors, existing benchmarks fail to measure performance on tasks that define practical professional expertise. Finance, in particular, has been identified as a domain with high AI exposure risk, yet lacks robust benchmarks to track real-world developments. This gap is compounded by the absence of clear accountability mechanisms in current Large Language Model (LLM) deployments. To address this, we introduce FrontierFinance, a long-horizon benchmark of 25 complex financial modeling tasks across five core finance models, requiring an average of over 18 hours of skilled human labor per task to complete. Developed with financial professionals, the benchmark reflects industry-standard financial modeling workflows and is paired with detailed rubrics for structured evaluation. We engage human experts to define the tasks, create rubrics, grade LLMs, and perform the tasks themselves as human baselines. We demonstrate that our human experts both receive higher scores on average, and are more likely to provide client-ready outputs than current state-of-the-art systems.

Michael Krumdick, Varshini Reddy, Shivani Chaudhary +8

Kensho Technologies · S&P Global · MIT

Computer-Use Agent Benchmarks LLM Evaluation AI Agent Benchmarks AI and Labor Quantitative Finance