Exacerbate Systemic Inefficiencies

Although effective, coding agents often incur substantial monetary costs. Their recurring cost-inefficient behaviors remain underexplored. We conduct the first study of behavioral cost inefficiencies in coding agents, analyzing 1,200 trajectories from Claude Code and Mini-SWE-Agent across four configurations on SWE-bench Verified. We identify three cost-inefficient behaviors: subsumed retrieval, similar script generation, and test re-execution. We then evaluate three mitigation strategies: structure-aware retrieval, agent-synthesized skills, and developer-designed skills, over 10k trajectories on held-out SWE-bench Verified and Pro tasks. Our main findings are: (1) The three behaviors affect 79.00%--98.00% of coding tasks and account for up to 22.75% of task cost. (2) Structure-aware retrieval can introduce retrieval overhead and alter agent delegation, causing inconsistent improvements in retrieval efficiency and cost increases of up to 28.14%. (3) Agent-synthesized skills tend to produce low-level, trace-specific guidance, limiting their effectiveness and generality. (4) In contrast, developer-designed skills provide high-level, trace-agnostic guidance, reducing cost by up to 41.73%, roughly twice the maximum gain from agent-synthesized skills.

The Model Context Protocol (MCP) standardizes how servers expose data and tools to Large Language Models (LLMs). A common server design embeds frequently used reference data, such as identifier lookup tables, directly in the server instructions: the system-prompt text a server hands to the host application. When a query concerns an entry of the embedded table, the model can act on it immediately instead of re-discovering the same information through a search tool. We test whether client LLMs actually consume such instruction-embedded data, reporting a 54,000-trial study across 24 LLMs (9 Claude, 6 Gemini, 9 GPT) on a production legal-information MCP server. A diagnostic condition that removes the competing search tool shows that failures are dominated by behavioral preference rather than missing capability. With search unavailable, 23 of 24 models read the embedded data reliably (hit ratio at least 98%); with a search tool merely present, 9 models drop below 15%. A 2^3 factorial analysis of three instruction-level interventions reveals strong interaction effects: combining all three restores at least 86% for 20 of 24 models, but individual interventions can backfire for specific model families. Per-server prompt engineering is therefore a workaround rather than a fix; we argue that MCP host applications should provide an explicit mechanism that places server instructions ahead of tool selection in the client LLM's deliberation.

Fixing GitHub issues in large-scale projects is a long-horizon task, especially when a fix requires changes across multiple locations or the issue description lacks the information needed to localize and repair it. As a result, agents traverse long trajectories that are prone to inefficiency and error: they drift away from their intended plan, repeat failed actions, or terminate without a working patch. This paper proposes LivePlan to monitor, detect, and correct such behavioral inefficiencies and drifts in real time. LivePlan decouples judging from advising: a deterministic, rule-based monitor examines general signals over the trajectory to detect issues without invoking an LLM, and only when an issue is detected does it consult an advisor LLM for a high-level, next-step correction. This design avoids the misleading re-planning and costly interventions of prior approaches. We implement LivePlan on top of SWE-agent and evaluate it using five LLMs (three as executor agents and two as advisors) across SWE-bench Verified and SWE-bench Pro. Compared to vanilla SWE-agent, LivePlan notably improves issue resolution rates, achieving consistent gains of up to 15.2% (average: 9.9%), while incurring only an additional cost of $0.08 per instance. The additional solutions concentrate on medium and hard instances. LivePlan consistently outperforms alternative approaches in resolution rate, with minimal regression on already successful runs and new successes on problems that no baseline solves.

Vision Transformers (ViTs) increasingly rely on input-adaptive inference, such as token pruning and early halting, to meet energy and latency budgets. This survey examines a recent class of adversarial efficiency degradation attacks that target these mechanisms to increase computation without necessarily degrading accuracy. We unify and compare two representative attacks, SlowFormer (a universal adversarial patch) and DeSparsify (per-image perturbations), across three popular token-pruning frameworks: A-ViT, ATS, and AdaViT. We standardize reporting using GFLOPs, accuracy loss, and an Attack Success (AS) metric that measures how much of the model's compute savings the attack takes away. Understanding these attacks is crucial for designing countermeasures that not only mitigate risk but also remain lightweight, since deployment often occurs in low-power settings such as mobile or embedded devices. To organize our analysis, we focus on three questions: how input-adaptive optimizations (e.g., token pruning and early halting) create attack surfaces for efficiency degradation; how such attacks operate in practice and which optimizations are most vulnerable; and which defenses exist today and whether they meaningfully restore efficiency under attack.

Data-driven remaining useful life (RUL) prediction requires complete degradation trajectories for training, yet such run-to-failure data are scarce and expensive. Practitioners currently lack principled guidance on how many failure examples suffice for a given model and accuracy target. This paper develops a sample complexity framework for RUL prediction comprising seven main results organised around three themes. First, we establish fundamental learning rates: a distribution-free generalization bound shows that the uniform deviation of the mean squared error decreases as $O(B^{2}\sqrt{p/n})$, where $p$ is the model complexity and $n$ the number of trajectories, and a minimax lower bound proves that the $Θ(p/n)$ rate is unimprovable.} \rev{Second, we quantify how domain knowledge accelerates learning: incorporating degradation physics reduces data requirements by up to two orders of magnitude for deep networks, a Bernstein-type analysis achieves the minimax-optimal $O(p/n)$ rate under high signal-to-noise conditions, and closed-form penalties reveal when an incorrectly assumed physics model hurts rather than helps. Third, we characterise the impact of data quality: fleet variability induces an irreducible bias$-$variance tradeoff, while right-censored observations suffer an efficiency loss that depends critically on the degradation class.} Closed-form expressions are provided for exponential, power-law, and stretched-exponential degradation. \rev{Cross-domain validation against published turbofan, battery, and bearing benchmarks confirms the theoretical predictions within a factor of 2$-$3 on average. The results yield practical guidelines for planning data collection, selecting model complexity, and evaluating physics model assumptions in prognostics applications.

Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting has significantly advanced the reasoning capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs), yet it often incurs substantial computational costs due to over-reasoning: the generation of redundant, verbose, or irrelevant steps. While existing reasoning step evaluators effectively detect logical fallacies and factual errors, our analysis reveals a critical blind spot: they fail to penalize valid but inefficient reasoning steps that inflate token usage without contributing to the solution. To systematically diagnose this limitation, we introduce RIV-GSM8K, a diagnostic benchmark injected with five distinct types of inefficiencies, including circular reasoning and excessive decomposition. Diagnostic experiments reveal that state-of-the-art evaluators struggle to distinguish these inefficiencies from necessary reasoning. To address this gap, we propose CAID (Context-Aware Information Density), a training-free metric grounded in information theory that identifies low-utility steps. To validate the metric's practical utility, we apply it within PACE, a post-hoc compression strategy. Additional control experiments show that the gains of PACE are not explained by trivial pruning: compared with random step removal and PRM-based compression baselines, it preserves accuracy at substantially higher compression rates. Empirical results on GSM8K, StrategyQA, and ARC-Challenge demonstrate that PACE reduces token consumption by 31-53% while maintaining accuracy, confirming that CAID successfully distills informational froth from reasoning chains without compromising deductive validity.

Local pairwise comparisons are a standard tool for learning how people want decision rules to work, e.g., in participatory design or alignment. However, their use builds in two strong assumptions: that local comparisons are sufficient evidence about how a person wants an automated decision rule to behave, and that people can always answer those comparisons decisively. We investigate how these assumptions may be compromised under internal pluralism: the idea that an individual evaluates decision rules according to multiple authoritative priorities about how the rule should behave. We provide a formal model of such pluralistic preferences over decision rules, which then lets us identify two distinct failures of forced local pairwise comparison data. First, priorities such as proportionality, egalitarianism, and equal treatment are inherently global: what they imply in one case can depend on what happens elsewhere, so local comparisons may fail to capture them. Second, even when priorities are representable locally, tension between strongly-held priorities can generate internal conflict, producing potentially costly behavioral distortions when comparisons are forced. We then use our model to investigate the alternative -- allowing people to report indecision -- and our findings suggest that doing so can considerably reduce the number of queries needed to learn preferences accurately. We conclude by describing how our model points toward preference-learning methods that elicit these priorities directly, yielding more faithful and interpretable accounts of what people value.

The complexity of waste disposal regulations across European countries poses significant challenges for the residents and hinders the transition to a Circular Economy. In Germany, the proper sorting and disposal of household waste remains challenging across municipalities. Consequently, substantially reducing incorrectly disposed waste is vital for improving waste management and advancing the Circular Economy. AI-based waste sorting solutions can support residents through user-friendly tools, such as mobile applications, that guide proper waste disposal. To be effective in supporting the Circular Economy, however, these solutions must be configurable to reflect the specific waste sorting scheme of individual municipalities in Germany. In the scope of this work, an evaluation and analysis are performed of two prominent classification strategies: OvA and OvR. The research uses a dataset constructed in alignment with the waste categories and sorting scheme of the city of Goslar in Germany. Moreover, this work aims to extend beyond the overall performance by examining the behavior of OvA and OvR classification strategies in identifying samples likely to be misclassified. These classification strategies are compared by applying varying confidence thresholds to identify uncertain samples for subsequent human review. This evaluation aims to balance the number of misclassifications against the human effort required for data annotation.

Large Language Model (LLM) cascade systems are designed to balance efficiency and performance by processing queries with lightweight models while selectively escalating complex cases to more powerful ones. Such systems seek to reduces computational cost and latency while maintaining task performance, making it an appealing choice for large-scale deployment. However, the cascade design introduces new vulnerabilities through an expanded attack surface: the inclusion of lightweight front-end models and internal decision mechanisms introduces new weaknesses. In this work, we present the first study demonstrating that LLM cascade systems are susceptible to targeted adversarial manipulation, which disrupts both performance objectives and the intended cost advantages of the cascade design. We propose a novel attack framework that employs constrained sequential collaborative optimization of adversarial suffix under cascade dependencies, enabling simultaneous exploitation of lightweight models and decision mechanisms. This framework adapts to adversaries with varying capabilities, inducing controllable degradation in both cost-efficiency and accuracy. Unlike prior attacks targeting standalone models, our approach strategically leverages the cascade structure to achieve significantly stronger impact. Extensive experiments across diverse datasets and representative LLM cascade systems validate the practicality and severity of this attack. Our findings highlight the urgent need to rigorously scrutinize the security of LLM cascade systems and call for broader attention to the systemic risks inherent in such designs.

Unconstructive debate and uncivil communication carry well-documented costs for productivity and cohesion, yet isolating their effect on operational efficiency has proven difficult. Human subject research in this domain is constrained by ethical oversight, limited reproducibility, and the inherent unpredictability of naturalistic settings. We address this gap by leveraging Large Language Model (LLM) based Multi-Agent Systems as a controlled sociological sandbox, enabling systematic manipulation of communicative behavior at scale. Using a Monte Carlo simulation framework, we generate thousands of structured 1-on-1 adversarial debates across varying toxicity conditions, measuring convergence time, defined as the number of rounds required to reach a conclusion, as a proxy for interactional efficiency. Building on a prior study, we replicate and extend its findings across two additional LLM agents of varying parameter size, allowing us to assess whether the effects of toxic behavior on debate dynamics generalize across model scale. The convergence latency of 25% reported in the previous study was confirmed. It was found that this latency is significantly bigger for models with fewer parameters. We further identify a significant first-mover advantage, whereby the agent initiating the discussion wins significantly above chance regardless of toxicity condition.

Computational models of collaboration without prior coordination often overlook how heterogeneous agent traits and complex task structures jointly produce systemic bottlenecks, inefficiencies, and contribution inequalities. We address this by using an agent-based model of ad-hoc teamwork in a kitchen environment. Our model integrates diverse agent personas with tasks that combine serial and parallel dependencies. We identify a specialist's dilemma, where rigid role assertion generates system-level bottlenecks, amplifies workload inequality, and fosters fragmented, homophilous networks. We also find that team size and communication overhead interact with problem structure to generate diminishing returns and redundant collaboration. Linking micro-level behavior to macro-level outcomes provides insights into emergent collaboration and design principles for effective multi-agent teamwork.

We introduce a finite-size gradient-transport framework for real language-model training, based on five observables $(D,z,β,δ,v_{\mathrm{rel}})$ that separate cascade size, duration, absolute transport, and intensive transport efficiency. We analyze direct raw-gradient measurements from Pico-LM across four scales and 125 aligned steps, together with a five-scale Pythia companion dataset built from 153 aligned checkpoint-difference update fields. The same algebraic closure holds in both families, and both share a near-unity cascade-size backbone, but they occupy distinct transport regimes: Pico-LM shows positive duration scaling and negative intensive-efficiency scaling, whereas Pythia remains near the $D=1$ baseline with only weak positive efficiency scale dependence. Randomized-field controls give nearly matched null floors in the intensive and duration channels, indicating that the contrast reflects different real departures from a shared null skeleton rather than different null calibrations. The families also differ in stepwise power-law compressibility: Pico-LM retains clean duration and efficiency power laws, whereas Pythia preserves the size backbone but shows weaker one-slope compressibility in those channels. External performance associations are correspondingly channel-level, carried mainly by $v_{\mathrm{rel}}$ and normalized cascade duration, while $D(t)$ acts as a shared size backbone without a significant exponent-level performance association. These results support a reusable transport measurement framework without claiming a universal fixed point or a first-principles derivation of neural scaling laws.

Modeling coordination among generative agents in complex multi-round decision-making presents a core challenge for AI and operations management. Although behavioral experiments have revealed cognitive biases behind supply chain inefficiencies, traditional methods face scalability and control limitations. We introduce a scalable experimental paradigm using Large Language Models (LLMs) to simulate multi-stage supply chain dynamics. Grounded in a Hierarchical Reasoning Framework, this study specifically analyzes the impact of cognitive heterogeneity on agent interactions. Unlike prior homogeneous settings, we employ DeepSeek and GPT agents to systematically vary reasoning sophistication across supply chain tiers. Through rigorously replicated and statistically validated simulations, we investigate how this cognitive diversity influences collective outcomes. Results indicate that agents exhibit myopic and self-interested behaviors that exacerbate systemic inefficiencies. However, we demonstrate that information sharing effectively mitigates these adverse effects. Our findings extend traditional behavioral methods and offer new insights into the dynamics of AI-enabled organizations. This work underscores both the potential and limitations of LLM-based agents as proxies for human decision-making in complex operational environments.

We examine how the cost of transforming qualitative information into precise numerical estimates--a form of integration cost--creates a structural friction in expectations formation. To isolate this integration cost from the costs of information awareness and acquisition, we exploit sell-side analyst reports, in which the same forecaster simultaneously produces textual narratives and numerical forecasts. Because the information underlying the text has already been acquired, any systematic gap between the two outputs can be attributed to integration costs. We document systematic quantification inefficiency: an analyst's textual tone negatively predicts her contemporaneous forecast errors and positively predicts her subsequent numerical revisions, revealing that analysts leave part of their qualitative insights unquantified until further evidence arrives. Consistent with this integration-friction explanation, this inefficiency intensifies when reports are linguistically vaguer, environmental uncertainty is higher, or analysts' processing capacity is more constrained, and it persists where strategic and behavioral explanations are weaker. Our findings provide direct, large-sample evidence that integration costs constitute a distinct economic friction, explaining why soft information carries value-relevant content beyond contemporaneous hard numbers.

Adversarial Imitation Learning (AIL) faces challenges with sample inefficiency because of its reliance on sufficient on-policy data to evaluate the performance of the current policy during reward function updates. In this work, we study the convergence properties and sample complexity of off-policy AIL algorithms. We show that, even in the absence of importance sampling correction, reusing samples generated by the $o(\sqrt{K})$ most recent policies, where $K$ is the number of iterations of policy updates and reward updates, does not undermine the convergence guarantees of this class of algorithms. Furthermore, our results indicate that the distribution shift error induced by off-policy updates is dominated by the benefits of having more data available. This result provides theoretical support for the sample efficiency of off-policy AIL algorithms. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first work that provides theoretical guarantees for off-policy AIL algorithms.