LLM Agent Evaluation

LLM: Large Language Model

Follow this topic Ask about this topic

Momentum

115 papers in the last four weeks, up 140% on the four weeks before. 1.1% of all new papers.

Jul 13Week of Sep 28

Latest papers 793

Aug 5, 2026cs.AI

OrchestraBench: Evaluating Multi-Agent Orchestration Failure Modes, Recovery, and Decomposition Quality

Multi-agent orchestration frameworks are moving from demos to production, yet benchmarks typically report task accuracy without diagnosing why a pipeline failed, where a cascade began, or which routing decision caused the breakdown. OrchestraBench evaluates failure, recovery, and decomposition through a controlled, seed-reproducible failure-injection harness over templated enterprise workflows. It introduces cascade radius and per-failure-mode recovery as primary metrics and compares routing policies with bootstrap confidence intervals and paired tests. On a 26-case gold-labelled diagnostic, a keyword/flag router scored 0% on adversarial cases with misleading or missing surface flags, whereas an intent-reasoning model router scored 100%, matching the oracle. Controlled mechanism probes with a real Claude agent over a verifiable arithmetic dependency chain revealed three failure-handling tiers across five MAST modes: tool faults recovered fully (1.0), ambiguous delegation recovered partially (0.30), and three latent or semantic modes never recovered (0.0). This ordering persisted when the computation was reframed as a loan-approval workflow and across Sonnet, Opus, and Haiku, although absolute rates shifted with context. Blind retry reproduced latent faults and increased time to detection, indicating that detection and attribution are necessary for containment. Cascade radius increased with pipeline depth (mean 0.9 to 4.7 across depths 3-7). A trusted-state repair ablation showed that apparent containment gains primarily came from the trusted-state signal rather than autonomous detection. These results are controlled-chain mechanism probes, not domain-workload claims.

Yidian Chen, Yingzi Gu, Natan Vidra +2

Anote

Agent Failure Analysis AI Agent Reliability Multi-Agent Orchestration Agent Reliability LLM Agent Evaluation Fault Detection+1

Aug 5, 2026cs.CR

When Does Latent Communication Pay? A Causal Audit of Relayed KV Caches in Multi-Agent LLMs

Multi-agent LLM systems relay key--value caches instead of text and credit their gains to exchanged ``latent thoughts''. That credit is a claim about \emph{which} example's cache is relayed, not merely that one is. We audit it causally in released systems. The cache is replaced with deranged (mismatched-example), zeroed, and moment-matched random counterparts, under two regimes defined by whether the receiver needs the sender's private information. Where it does, the battery reads ceiling: 100% against 23--25% for answer-irrelevant relays on the primary backbone, a contrast replicated across three families, five checkpoints, and a prose document-QA surface. Where it does not, a pre-registered five-seed protocol establishes equivalence within 2.8 points, a margin anchored to the audited system's reported gain, under Holm-corrected TOST on GSM8K and ARC-Challenge across three Qwen3 scales and on MedQA at 8B (one cell shows a small detected advantage inside the margin); a second family shows no detected advantage. A large cache effect need not be a pairing effect. In one natural cell, zeroing the relay costs 14.7 points; a mismatched cache, 0.4. Nor is need sufficient: under the same test, delivered channels span ceiling (LatentMAS's native relay), partial (KVComm's layer subset), and no detected example-specific transfer (C2C's released projector). Benchmark deltas do not by themselves establish latent-thought transmission; establishing it takes a mismatched-cache audit, which we release.

Jiaming Cheng, Subhransu Das, Rajiv Ramnath

Independent Researcher · The Ohio State University

KV Caching LLM Agent Evaluation Multi-Agent Communication Multi-Agent LLMs

Aug 5, 2026cs.CL

Skill-Use: Can LLMs Actually Use Skills in Agentic Harnesses?

Large language model (LLM) agents increasingly rely on skills, structured documents that specify when to act, which procedure to follow, and which tools are allowed. Existing evaluations mostly judge the quality of a skill or its contribution to task success, leaving unexamined whether an agent can recognize a relevant skill and apply it on its own. We introduce Skill-Use, a benchmark that evaluates skill use under progressive disclosure, where an agent sees only a skill's name and short description and must retrieve the full procedure before following it. Skill-Use separates three facets of skill use. Trigger measures whether the agent invokes the relevant skill, Compliance measures how faithfully it follows the prescribed procedure, and Boundary measures whether it avoids forbidden operations. A Skill-Use (SU) score combines the three and credits execution only after the skill is triggered. Skill-Use pairs 79 real skills with 177 executable tasks across nine domains, each grounded in real files, run in an isolated Docker sandbox, and scored by a trajectory-based rubric. Evaluating eight LLMs under two agent harnesses, we find that reliable skill use remains out of reach, as the strongest configuration reaches an SU of only 0.613. Triggering and procedural compliance fail as independent bottlenecks, and both scores and model rankings shift with the harness, so skill use behaves as a capability conditioned on the harness rather than a fixed property of the model.

Jinyi Han, Yuanjian Xu, Ying Liao +6

1East China Normal University · 2Hong Kong University of Science and Technology · 3Fudan University +1

LLM Agent Evaluation LLM Agent Skill Retrieval LLM Agents LLM Agent Harnesses

Aug 5, 2026cs.AI

Diagnosing Tool-Selection Reasoning in LLM Agents with Canary Tools

Agent evaluations tell us that a model picked the wrong tool, but rarely why. We introduce canary tools: diagnostic probe tools planted in an agent's Model Context Protocol (MCP) tool set, each engineered to probe one specific tool-selection weakness. A six-type taxonomy (semantic decoys, parameter traps, capability mirages, prerequisite blindness, temporal decoys, and granularity traps) turns a single "wrong tool" outcome into a multi-dimensional profile of how a model reasons about tools. We evaluate eight models -- six hosted and two 8B open-weight -- spanning three capability tiers, on 120 tasks across three canary-density conditions and three seeds (8,640 runs), plus a 2,880-run subtlety ablation. Task success is graded by a provider-independent judge, corroborated by a second independent judge (Cohen's kappa = 0.75). We report three findings. First, susceptibility drops sharply as models get more capable: the per-task canary susceptibility rate (CSR) ranges about 36x across models, lowest for Claude Opus 4.8 and highest for Llama 3.1 8B. Second, capability tier alone does not predict safety: the most susceptible hosted model is mid-tier, and within a provider the cheaper model can be the safer one. Third, the taxonomy is capability-stratified: capability mirages most reliably trap frontier models, while the other types are largely inert on strong models but fire on small open models, so they discriminate by capability rather than being weak. Softening each canary's give-away phrase leaves frontier CSR essentially unchanged, evidence that the probes measure reasoning, not phrase-spotting. Susceptibility also predicts task failure (Spearman rho = -0.34), while the most robust models are not significantly degraded by canary pressure. We release the framework, canary schemas, tasks, and logs.

Atul Anand, Sourav Chattaraj

LLM Agent Evaluation Tool-Using Language Agents Language Model Probing LLM Agent Reliability

Aug 4, 2026cs.MA

Strategic Evaluation of Planning Strategies for LLM Agents in Cyber-Physical Systems

LLM-agent evaluations commonly measure task success or agreement with a declared plan. In strategic cyber-physical systems, an architecture must also remain appropriate after autonomous participants respond and physics constrains outcomes. We introduce a controlled benchmark of planning-induced control trajectories: ordered planning operations and directives linking execution architecture to strategic response and physical consequences. Four coded executors (predefined, sequential, hierarchical, and search) control demand response for 40 prosumers on a radial feeder. The LLM declares or advises typed policies and mediates communication; schedules, base prosumer dynamics, stochastic actions, and power flow remain explicit code. Paired forced-mode counterfactuals, exact-prompt caching, common response draws with separate randomness streams, critic isolation, and event-level feasibility isolate comparisons. The Llama-3.3-70B experiments on this feeder distinguish three properties. First, forced search is the oracle in all five baseline seeds under the specified objective. Second, injected objective substitution preserves mode agreement at 1.0 while increasing cumulative voltage shortfall by 2.68x. Third, the 144-scenario, 576-episode factorial bank, using three repeated seeds, contains feasible oracles from predefined, sequential, and search. The prespecified stress-held-out ridge has mean regret 90.7 and no observed value over fixed sequential. A post-hoc constraint-aware analysis reduces regret to 29.0; a simple deadline rule attains 28.7, so this gain does not establish a learning advantage. An all-feasible ablation does not improve over fixed search. These are simulation-internal, descriptive comparisons. A five-model, 300-declaration extension tests interface behaviour, not cross-backbone physical rankings; shared-endpoint latency tails motivate probabilistic live feasibility.

J. de Curtò, I. de Zarzà

Department of Computer Applications in Science and Engineering, BARCELONA Supercomputing Center, Barcelona, Spain · Escuela T´ecnica Superior de Ingenier´ıa (ICAI), Universidad Pontificia Comillas, Madrid, Spain · Human-Centered AI, Data and Software, LUXEMBOURG Institute of Science and Technology, Esch-sur-Alzette, Luxembourg

Cyber-Physical Systems LLM Planning LLM Agent Evaluation AI Agent Benchmarks Demand Response

Aug 4, 2026cs.AI

ContinualSkillBench: Can LLM Agents Truly Evolve Their Capabilities?

Modern agent frameworks equip large language models with external skill libraries to solve complex tasks. However, it remains unclear whether these systems can effectively evolve their skills and whether the resulting skills improve task-solving capabilities. To bridge this gap, we introduce ContinualSkillBench, a dynamic evaluation framework for in-context continual skill learning. It covers five representative domains, each containing 100 interconnected subtasks ordered by increasing difficulty and opportunities for cross-task skill reuse. Our experiments show that sequential execution generally improves performance, but the gains vary substantially across models and domains. Moreover, in-context learning performs comparably to explicit skill maintenance on average, suggesting that much of the improvement arises from adaptation to prior context and feedback rather than reusable skill abstraction alone. Explicit skills nevertheless provide selective benefits for tasks requiring reusable procedures or precise outputs. We further find that less capable models tend to accumulate larger, more fragmented collections of task-specific skills. These findings show that current in-context skill evolution mechanisms can support continual adaptation, but still struggle to consistently consolidate experience into robust and transferable skills.

Tianyi Guan, Yiding Wang, Haotong Yang +5

Institute for Artificial Intelligence, Peking University · 2Beijing Institute for General Artificial Intelligence

Continual Learning for LLM Agents LLM Agent Evaluation LLM Agent Skill Learning AI Agent Benchmarks

Aug 4, 2026cs.AI

GDPevo: Evaluating Agent Self-Evolution on Real Business Tasks

Agent self-evolution updates an agent's persistent state from prior experience and reuses it to solve related tasks more effectively. Evaluating self-evolution is difficult: existing benchmarks provide limited coverage of economically valuable task domains, do not always design training and test tasks such that test-time gains can be attributed to training experience, and remain vulnerable to data contamination. We present GDPevo, an evolution-native benchmark grounded in GDP-related enterprise workflows, together with the fully automated data pipeline that generates it. Its core mechanism, rule hybridization, decomposes each enterprise workflow into atomic business rules, distributes subsets of these rules across training tasks, and recombines them in held-out test tasks so that test-time gains are attributable. GDPevo spans CRM, ERP, finance, healthcare, legal, and data-centric workflows. Its V1 release contains 120 tasks in 12 groups, with five training and five held-out test tasks per group. Full automation enables the pipeline to expand the suite to 240 tasks in 24 groups (V2) within two days, providing a practical response to contamination. Using GDPevo, we evaluate four agents, each comprising a harness and a model, under four supervision types. Self-evolution consistently improves held-out accuracy by up to 16.44 percentage points. But the best evolved agents remain far below the fully informed oracle ceiling of 91.6%, indicating that the self-evolution ability of current agents remains far from fully realized. We publicly release the pipeline, benchmark, and full evaluation results at https://github.com/Prism-Shadow/GDPevo.

Leijun Zhou, Zhihao Liu, Xiang Qu +9

PrismShadow · New York University

LLM Agent Evaluation AI Agent Benchmarks Self-Evolving Agents

Aug 4, 2026cs.AI

Agents Catching Agents: Shortcut Cascades and Benchmark Gaming in Clinical Multi-Agent Systems

Clinical decision support is moving toward committees of language-model agents deliberating on a shared workspace. We ask whether such committees can be gamed by shortcuts, cues a benchmark rewards but a clinician would ignore. Across seven cohorts on six public datasets spanning text (MedQA-USMLE, MedMCQA, MIMIC-CXR reports), imaging (NIH ChestX-ray14, MIMIC-CXR-JPG, CheXpert) and tabular ICU records (SUPPORT2), Gemini committees resist these cues in isolation (flip 5-16%), yet a socially plausible shortcut spreads: when two peers assert the same wrong answer, the holdout under test adopts it in 38% of cases, as does a false "pre-screen" system flag, on both capability tiers. Of three oversight agents, a gate cannot separate adoption from honest agreement (false-positive rate 100%); a same-lineage judge reading only the transcript flags adoption on text (precision 100%, recall 93%) but collapses onto the gate in imaging; a referee that privately re-queries the holdout transfers to imaging (77-88% precision, 13-21% false-positive rate). Tripling a cue's visual salience does not move contagion, whereas a second peer voice raises it by half again. Gaming a hidden rubric is near-silent: only 1/10 text and 1/134 imaging drifters name the rubric they moved toward. What games a committee is social plausibility, and only a referee independent of self-report catches it. Code: https://github.com/criticaldata/benchmaxxing

Sebastián Andrés Cajas Ordóñez, Agastya Munnangi, Aldo Marzullo +13

MIT Critical Data, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States · Georgia State University, Atlanta, Georgia, United States · Politecnico di Milano, Milan, Italy +12

AI Agent Reliability Multi-Agent LLM Systems Clinical Decision Support LLM Agent Evaluation Multi-Agent Systems AI Agent Safety Benchmarks+1

Aug 4, 2026cs.AI

When Outputs Disperse, Does Epistemic Revision Follow? A Black-Box Diagnostic for Machine Collectives

Collective intelligence research treats disagreement as evidence of epistemic diversity: if agents express different views, the group should retain capacity to revise. In LLM collectives this proxy can break: agents can produce diverse-looking arguments while preserving the same conclusion. We operationalize dispersion-revision coupling: the degree to which an intervention that verifiably increases the dispersion of a collective's outputs in embedding space is accompanied by genuine revision of its epistemic stance rather than premise-preserving reformulation. The diagnostic is black-box: it operates on generated text alone and makes no claims about the internal representations of the generating models. Two channels are measured independently: an output channel, the Coherence Index (CI), verifies that the intervention changed output dispersion; an epistemic channel, per-turn stance annotation, measures whether the collective revised. We propose CI with the Meta-Predictive Clarity System (MPCS), which inserts a Re-Differentiation Protocol (RDP) when outputs over-converge, as a reusable method for estimating this coupling regime. We evaluate five-agent collectives from two configurations (gpt-4o-mini and gemini-2.5-flash; 310 paired episodes per condition). On gpt-4o-mini, conditional dissent improves false-premise recovery by +17.7 points (p<1e-6) while static persona diversity harms recovery (-8.1, p=.007). On gemini-2.5-flash, the same intervention at a comparable budget yields no gain (26.1% vs 27.1%, p=.84) despite a verified dispersion drop; the two treatment effects differ from each other (z=3.79, p<.001). Mechanism tagging shows Gemini preserves the false premise via intra-framework dissent: 94% of tagged post-RDP responses reformulate rather than concede (vs 24% on GPT). We recommend reporting per-intervention stance shift and premise-preservation rate alongside accuracy.

Molood Arman

Independent Researcher Lyon, France

LLM Agent Evaluation Multi-Agent Debate Multi-Agent Systems Multi-Agent Consensus

Aug 4, 2026cs.CR

DiagChain: A Diagnostic Benchmark for Evaluating LLM Agents on Evidence-Grounded Attack Chain Reconstruction

Large Language Model (LLM) agents offer a promising approach to attack chain reconstruction by retrieving and interpreting heterogeneous telemetry to infer ordered attacker actions. However, existing benchmarks mainly evaluate final outputs or aggregate accuracy, providing limited insight into how errors arise and propagate across intermediate reasoning stages. We present DiagChain, a diagnostic benchmark for evidence-grounded attack chain reconstruction that enables stage-wise evaluation of LLM agents. DiagChain includes MAIN-69, a suite of 69 scenarios spanning multiple operating systems, evidence noise levels, and chain lengths. It further introduces Evidence-Centric Retrieval-Augmented Generation (ECRAG), which couples evidence retrieval with an evolving structured representation of the reconstructed chain. Five complementary metrics are introduced to assess distinct stages of the reconstruction process and support systematic failure diagnosis. Based on evaluations using 6 LLMs, DiagChain reveals that even the strongest configuration succeeds on only 39.6% of the 849 reference steps in MAIN-69. Our analysis further shows that smaller models struggle with the more basic task of incorporating retrieved evidence into their outputs, whereas larger models can proceed to later steps, where correctly ordering that evidence becomes the main bottleneck. These results validate the importance of diagnostic evaluation beyond end-to-end accuracy and provide actionable insights for improving evidence-grounded cybersecurity agents.

Xuyang Liu, Yibin Han, Zhenwei Zhang +8

KLISS, BNRist, School of Software, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China · CRRC Corporation Limited, Beijing, China

Retrieval-Augmented Generation LLM Agent Evaluation AI Agent Security Benchmarks LLMs for Cybersecurity

Aug 4, 2026cs.AI

DataSpace: Benchmarking Data Agents for Verifiable Analytics over Heterogeneous Workspaces

Data agents enable natural-language analytics over organizational workspaces, where relevant evidence may be scattered across databases, structured files, long documents, and multimedia. Existing benchmarks largely isolate structured querying, retrieval, or open-ended analysis, leaving heterogeneous evidence discovery, complete tabular outputs, and deterministic evaluation insufficiently unified. We introduce DataSpace, a benchmark in which data agents produce verifiable tabular results from task-local heterogeneous workspaces. It contains 410 cross-language tasks and 7,439 artifacts totaling 15.01 GB across CSV, JSON, SQLite, Markdown, PDF, and video. DataSpace also served as the official evaluation benchmark for the KDD Cup 2026 Data Agents for Complex Data Analysis competition. Each agent receives only a question and workspace and returns the complete requested tabular result. We construct DataSpace with DataSpace-Builder, an execution-grounded framework comprising cross-language transformation, constraint-aware relational sampling, modality routing and artifact rendering, and human review and task repair by 11 domain experts. A deterministic evaluator performs header-invariant column alignment, type- and precision-aware normalization, and order-aware row comparison. Across six recently released frontier multimodal models and five widely used agent harnesses, the best accuracy reaches 66.34%, while harness choice creates a 15.36-point spread with the backbone fixed. Multimodal evidence integration and joins consistently reduce accuracy across all six backbones. These results show that DataSpace remains unsaturated and identify key challenges for improving data-agent reliability.

Boyan Li, Zhuowen Liang, Yupeng Xie +11

HKUST(GZ) · Tsinghua University

LLM Agent Evaluation Multimodal Agents Agent Benchmarks Data Analysis Agents

Aug 4, 2026cs.CY

EduClaw-Bench: A Long-Horizon Benchmark for Pedagogical LLM Agents with Simulated Learners

Large language models (LLMs) power educational applications from tutoring to essay scoring, but each is a point solution to a single task, and only recently have these point solutions been integrated into agents operating over a learning management system (LMS). Yet tutoring is long-horizon, since a learner improves over days and weeks rather than in a single turn, and no benchmark evaluates an agent tutor across a sustained relationship. We introduce EduClaw-Bench, a benchmark that places an agent tutor in a continuous 30-day relationship with a simulated learner grounded in knowledge tracing (KT), whose knowledge-concept mastery, from a KT model trained on real-student data, drives its answers and is probed for learning gain across 55 scenarios. Each agent is scored on three primary axes (learning gain, responsiveness, and helpfulness) and two curriculum-design axes (Gagné and Rosenshine), with helpfulness and the curriculum axes judged by a cross-family panel of three LLM judges. Evaluating 10 agent adapters over three base-model tiers yields two findings that single-tier, single-session evaluation cannot reach. First, tutoring quality belongs to the base model and the agent harness together rather than either alone. Second, almost no combination sustains good tutoring over the full horizon. A calibration check (

\text{ECE}=0.049

) and a live-classroom field study confirm that the simulated learner and its measurements track reality. Our work is a step toward trustworthy AI tutors for future education.

Unggi Lee, Sookbun Lee, Yeil Jeong +3

Korea University Sejong Campus · Opentutorials · Indiana University +2

Intelligent Tutoring Systems AI in Education LLM Agent Evaluation Long-Horizon Agent Evaluation AI Agent Benchmarks

Aug 4, 2026cs.AI

Adversarial Stress Testing of Role-Playing Language Agents using Multi-Agent Evaluation

Role-Playing Language Agents (RPLAs) are increasingly deployed in high-stakes applications such as healthcare assistance, customer support, and education, where maintaining consistent personas, ethical constraints, and behavioral coherence under adversarial pressure is critical. Existing evaluation approaches rely on static benchmarks or isolated single-turn prompts that fail to capture cumulative behavioral failures emerging over extended interactions. We present a modular multi-agent platform for adversarially stress-testing RPLAs through structured, multi-turn dialogue. The system coordinates three agents: a strategy-driven Interrogator Agent that applies six progressive adversarial strategies, a Target Agent representing the RPLA under evaluation, and an automated Judging Agent that scores behavior across role fidelity, drift, ethical deviation, and consistency dimensions. Through experiments across three personas and three LLM families, we demonstrate that multi-strategy adversarial evaluation reveals failure modes invisible to single-strategy testing, reducing overall robustness scores by 0.17--0.20 points on average. Cross-model validation confirms consistent degradation patterns across Llama-3.3-70B, GPT-4o-mini, and Claude-3.5-Haiku, with Authority Challenge and Emotional Manipulation emerging as the most effective attack strategies. Automated judging achieves strong human alignment (

r = 0.82

, Fleiss'

κ= 0.71

). This work is released as an open-source platform to support AI safety and reproducible RPLA benchmarking. While the framework enables systematic discovery of failure modes, we acknowledge potential ethical risks associated with adversarial testing methodologies and emphasize responsible usage for improving AI safety.

Saqib Shouqi, Abdullah Nazly, Januki Wanniarachchi +1

School of Computing, Informatics Institute of Technology, Colombo, Sri Lanka

Adversarial Attacks on LLMs LLM Agent Evaluation AI Agent Evaluation Multi-Turn Dialogue Evaluation AI Agent Safety Benchmarks

Aug 4, 2026cs.AI

UrbanAgent: A Tool-Augmented Agent for Cross-System Urban Tasks

Modern cities rely on an increasing number of digital services to operate, but residents' daily needs are still difficult to meet. Services are fragmented and have little interoperability, placing a heavy operational burden on users. Existing digital platforms, urban foundation models, and intelligent assistants each address only isolated aspects of an urban task. But they struggle to reliably convert complex natural-language requests into executable cross-system workflows. We propose Urban-Agent, a tool-augmented agent framework for cross-system urban tasks. It couples the cognitive and reasoning capabilities of a large language model with a tool-set supporting code execution, API calls, and Model Context Protocol. Through one adaptive closed loop, it clarifies missing information before acting, grounds tool use in live observations, and aligns the final response with observed evidence and task constraints. To address the evaluation gap, we introduce Urban-Eval, a benchmark specifically designed for cross-system urban request. Unlike prior benchmarks that assess either general tool use or urban knowledge and reasoning, Urban-Eval evaluates both task results and execution quality, including required tool coverage, dependency validity, and evidence traceability. Experimental results indicate that Urban-Agent reaches a 71% task success rate, 10 points above the strongest baseline. This lead holds across GPT-5-mini, Gemini-2.5-flash, DeepSeek-V4-flash, and Qwen3-235B-A22B.

Jiayu Cao, Xingyuan Zeng, feiyu Li +6

LLM Agent Evaluation AI Agent Benchmarks Tool-Using Language Agents

Aug 4, 2026cs.LG

An Explainable LLM Agent Layer for Open-World Anomaly Detection in Oil Wells

Open-World Learning (OWL) pipelines for oil well anomaly detection have recently been shown to combine autoencoder-based detection, multiclass classification, and Mahalanobis-based novelty detection on the public 3W dataset. These pipelines answer \textit{what happened}, but they do not explain \textit{why the model believes it} or \textit{what the operator should do next}, and they do not put a human-readable name on the novelty clusters they discover. This paper evaluates a Large Language Model (LLM) agent layer placed downstream of the OWL pipeline, designed as a \textbf{companion} to the published upstream methods rather than a replacement. Using the Qwen3.5-397B-A17B Mixture-of-Experts model served via NVIDIA NIM, the agent receives structured sensor metrics and upstream classification or novelty assertions, and returns natural-language justifications, confidence-ranked critiques, and consolidated names for detected novelties. Across three studies spanning 989 real well-file segments from the 3W dataset, the agent achieved

35.1\%

top-1 /

63.9\%

top-3 (95% CI [56.9, 70.4]) classification on all nine classes,

71.7\%

top-2 validation [64.8, 77.6] with precision

0.91

[0.84, 0.95] across 7 probed classes, and

89.7\%

novelty detection [87.0, 91.9] with stable cluster naming on 5 of 7 hidden classes. The agent is not a standalone classifier. Its role is to: (1) confirm upstream decisions when sensor evidence supports them, (2) justify decisions in sensor-grounded language operators can audit, (3) flag disagreement when upstream labels are implausible, and (4) name novelties so that clustered unlabeled events arrive at the engineer with a consolidated human-readable label. The goal is to close the explainability gap that currently blocks deployment of OWL pipelines in operational settings.

Lucas Gouveia Omena Lopes, Thales Miranda de Almeida Vieira, Eduardo Toledo de Lima Junior +1

Laboratory of Scientific Computing and Visualization, Federal University of Alagoas, Maceio, Alagoas, Brazil · Computing Institute, Federal University of Alagoas, Maceio, Alagoas, Brazil

Interpretable Anomaly Detection LLM Agent Evaluation Industrial Anomaly Detection Anomaly Detection

Aug 3, 2026cs.MA

Everyone Conforms, No One Believes: Pluralistic Ignorance in LLM Agent Populations

LLM-based multi-agent systems are increasingly used to simulate social dynamics, from opinion formation to collective decision-making. These simulations can reproduce certain social phenomena, but it is unknown whether they capture pluralistic ignorance, a state where a majority privately rejects a norm yet publicly conforms, each believing they are alone in dissenting. This phenomenon drives norm persistence, social movements, and political revolutions. We show that pluralistic ignorance emerges robustly in LLM agent populations. We construct a benchmark of 100 scenarios across 10 domains and 5 authority levels, grounded in the human pluralistic ignorance literature, and evaluate 8 models from 6 organizations. Agents publicly conform at rates of 64 to 94% despite privately opposing the norm. Conformity is domain-sensitive (workplace and social relationship scenarios produce near-universal compliance) and highly model-dependent, though uncorrelated with capability. We test whether a single "norm entrepreneur" can break the false consensus by publicly dissenting. For 7 of 8 models, cascades succeed less than 26% of the time, with one model showing zero cascades across all scenarios. GPT-4o is a notable outlier at 48%, revealing qualitatively distinct dynamics across model families. A prompt component ablation across all 8 models establishes that conformity is emergent rather than instruction-driven: removing both the false-consensus framing and fit-in goal reduces conformity but does not eliminate it (52 to 92% in the minimal condition). Our findings identify model selection as an unacknowledged degree of freedom that fundamentally shapes simulation outcomes. More broadly, the near-absence of cascades suggests LLM simulations may systematically overestimate the stability of social norms, missing the fragile tipping-point dynamics that drive real-world norm change in human societies.

Yashwanth YS

Language Technologies Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, USA

Multi-Agent LLM Systems Normative Conformity in Language Models Human Behavior Simulation LLM Agent Evaluation Large Language Model-Based Social Simulation Emergent Behavior in Multi-Agent Systems

Aug 3, 2026cs.AI

ParEvalLayer: When Partial LLM-Agent Evaluations Support a Decision

LLM-agent evaluations often produce task outcomes long before the full benchmark run is complete. A partial score is tempting to report, but it does not show whether the observed tasks support the same conclusion as the completed evaluation. Early tasks can omit important parts of a benchmark, running cheaper tasks first can distort the observed sample, and a rule that decides only easy pairs can appear accurate while leaving many comparisons unresolved. We introduce ParEvalLayer, a decision layer that reads paired outcomes for two agent systems and a comparison policy chosen in advance. For each partial run, it records whether the tested agent system is better by the required amount, is not better by that amount, needs more evidence, or should abstain. We evaluate ParEvalLayer by replaying completed public benchmark data as if each evaluation had stopped earlier. At each point, ParEvalLayer applies the policy using only the outcomes observed so far; if it reaches one of the two comparison judgments, we check whether that judgment matches the completed data for the same system pair. With the main comparison rule, three of the public benchmarks reach the same decision as the completed evaluation after observing only 15% to 25% of task outcomes. Other benchmarks require more task outcomes. This variation shows why a partial score alone is not enough: reports should also state the decision rule and how many comparisons remain without a decision.

Wei-Jung Huang, Bonan Shen

Independent Researcher · United States

Pairwise Comparison LLM Agent Evaluation AI Agent Benchmarks Automated Evaluation

Aug 3, 2026cs.CL

ScrambleToolBench: Agents Search Exhaustively Even When Their Own Map Points to the Next Step

To operate robustly in open-world environments, autonomous agents should be able to infer the behavior of unfamiliar systems through interaction alone, even in the absence of documentation. However, existing tool-use benchmarks expose semantic tool schemas in static environments, allowing agents to rely on prior knowledge rather than autonomous discovery. To address this limitation, we introduce ScrambleToolBench, an interactive terminal benchmark designed to isolate behavioral reasoning. By removing semantic cues and enforcing a continuous task curriculum, the benchmark requires agents to uncover hidden tool behaviors entirely through trial-and-error interaction. The benchmark further introduces dynamic challenges, including mapping drift, stochastic action failures, and temporal execution windows, to evaluate whether agents can revise and adapt their hypotheses as the environment changes. Our evaluation of state-of-the-art language models reveals that successful initial discovery does not translate into robust adaptation. When faced with structural changes such as mapping drift, agents fail to use deductive strategies such as cycle tracing, and instead exhibit belief inertia or fall back to exhaustive search. Increasing test-time reasoning only amplifies this expensive brute-force search rather than enabling deductive recovery. While equipping agents with persistent memory reduces compounding errors, they remain unable to efficiently infer structural changes, highlighting a gap in current agent reasoning.

Vernon Toh, Navonil Majumder, Zhengyuan Liu +2

DeCLaRe Lab, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore · Agency for Science, Technology, and Research (A*STAR), Singapore

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

Aug 3, 2026cs.AI

From Profiling to Synthesis: Benchmarking Implicit Behavioral Alignment in Personalized LLM Agents

Large Language Models have enabled increasingly capable autonomous agents, yet personalization remains critical for making such agents practically useful. Recent benchmarks have begun evaluating personalization in agents, but they largely rely on static preference snapshots, fixed interaction logs, or question answering over predefined user profiles. Such designs fail to capture the complexity of evolving user preferences and neglect preference-conditioned task execution-a discrepancy we term as the knowledge-to-action gap. To address this challenge, we introduce IBA-Bench, a benchmark for implicit behavioral alignment constructed from longitudinal interaction histories that contain noise, implicit cues, and temporal inconsistencies. Unlike prior work, IBA-Bench evaluates whether an agent can execute tasks while satisfying implicit user constraints inferred from historical interactions. We further propose IBA-Agent, an agent framework that reconciles conflicting priorities through broad retrieval and trajectory-level alignment. Experiment results on IBA-Bench show that effective personalization remains a significant challenge for state-of-the-art LLM agents, and the proposed IBA-Agent substantially improves behavioral alignment in complex scenarios across nine application domains.

Jiajia Song, Bobo Li, Haiwen Yi +6

National University of Singapore · University of Toronto · University of Minnesota Twin Cities +2

LLM Personalization LLM Agent Evaluation AI Agent Benchmarks

Aug 3, 2026cs.AI

GABench: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Evaluating LLM Agents on Graph Analysis Tasks

Large language model (LLM) agents are increasingly capable of planning, using tools, and interacting with external environments. They are typically supported by harnesses, which manage state and coordinate multi-step execution. Graph analysis provides a promising setting for evaluating their agentic capabilities, because it requires agents to access data and execute operations in a graph environment. However, existing graph benchmarks for LLMs provide limited coverage of graph tasks and graph types, making it difficult to comprehensively evaluate LLM agents. Moreover, they typically formulate graph analysis as text-based question answering, where graph information is directly provided in the prompt, limiting the evaluation of end-to-end agentic capabilities. To address these limitations, we introduce GABench, a comprehensive benchmark for agentic graph analysis. GABench spans three graph types and covers four graph analysis task categories: graph retrieval, graph theory, graph machine learning, and graph open-ended question answering. GABench also provides 84 executable tools for accessing graph data and performing diverse graph operations. Building on these tools, we develop an agentic graph analysis task generation pipeline and construct 10,400 tasks with verifiable ground truth.Using GABench, we evaluate a range of frontier LLMs and agent harnesses. Our experiments reveal three key findings: (1) Existing LLM agents still struggle with complex graph analysis tasks. (2) Harness choice significantly affects performance, yet existing harnesses remain limited on complex graph tasks. (3) Graph analysis depends more on tool-call quality than quantity. Our findings provide practical insights into the development and evaluation of LLM agents for graph analysis.

Jiarui Tan, Zhongjian Zhang, YaBo Guo +5

Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications · The Chinese University of Hong Kong · Peking University

LLM Agent Evaluation AI Agent Benchmarks LLM Agent Harnesses

Aug 3, 2026cs.AI

GISAgentBench: A Practitioner-Sourced Benchmark for Evaluating LLM Agents on GIS Tasks

Geographic Information System (GIS) professionals rely on multi-step spatial analysis workflows to support decision-making in urban planning, disaster response, and environmental monitoring. The process is tedious, time-consuming, and error-prone. While recent large language model (LLM) agents equipped with external tools have the potential to automate geospatial analysis, their ability to perform realistic GIS workflows remains largely unexplored. Existing GIS agent benchmarking datasets are mostly drawn from textbooks, tutorials, or LLM-generated seeds and remain limited in size and trajectory depth. More importantly, none provides ground truth outputs. They therefore rely on surrogate signals such as code similarity, trajectory matching, or LLM and VLM judges, which can conflate workflow resemblance with task correctness. To address this gap, we introduce GISAgentBench, a benchmark of 349 multi-step GIS tasks curated from GIS Stack Exchange and instantiated on real public data across six selected geographic areas of interest. Each task ships with an executable reference trajectory and an exact ground truth output file, enabling strict, deterministic, tolerance-aware output matching beyond LLM judging. Evaluations of six LLM models reveal that realistic GIS workflows remain challenging: the best agent completes only 32.7% of tasks under strict tolerance-aware scoring, although most models produce outputs that are close to the ground truth.

Abhinav Pothuri, Zhe Jiang, Zelin Xu +1

Department of Computer & Information Science & Engineering, University of Florida · Department of Geography, University of Florida

LLM Agent Evaluation AI Agent Benchmarks Spatial Reasoning

Aug 2, 2026cs.CR

Permission Denied: Policy-Graded Evaluation of Coding Agents in Hardened Environments

Coding agents increasingly run inside organizations whose security controls (scoped credentials, restricted egress, read-only filesystems, non-root execution) constrain them like any other software. Existing benchmarks, however, evaluate agents almost exclusively in permissive sandboxes, so it is unknown how performance changes when policy is enforced. In this work, we evaluate 12 coding agents on Terminal-Bench 2.1 across nested security policy levels derived from common real-world enterprise restrictions. Hardening is never free but far from uniform: under the strictest policy, success losses reach 18.3 points and cost inflation 167.3%, and the two axes disagree; the model that best preserves success is also the one that loses the most efficiency, so model choice is policy-dependent. Beyond aggregate scores, we characterize how agents behave when policy blocks their actions and decompose the failures hardening induces: runs grind into timeouts or wrong solutions rather than stopping early, in a mix that differs by model. To ground comparisons, we verify task solvability under the strictest policy, separating model failures from tasks the policy forecloses. We release Boundary-Bench, an open-source hardening plugin enabling policy-constrained evaluation of coding agents on Terminal-Bench and compatible benchmarks.

Dotan Davidovich, Yair Amar, Hai Rozencwajg +1

Accomplish AI

Software Engineering Agents LLM Agent Evaluation AI Agent Security Benchmarks Tool Access Control for LLM Agents

Aug 2, 2026cs.AI

Humans Are More Diverse: Frontier LLMs Show Extreme Policies in Idealised AI Development Races

An AI development race creates a multi-agent safety dilemma. Each company can develop slowly and safely, or move faster while taking a risk that may remove its final reward. We use this repeated game to study strategic safety behaviour among large language model (LLM) agents in races with two to five players. However, a valid action does not show that an agent understands the game. We therefore place an audit gate before behavioural interpretation. We first verify the game engine, then test rule recall, state tracking, payoff calculation, and stability under different but equivalent task descriptions. We then compare LLM action sequences with an evolutionary game-theory benchmark and published human data, and explore differences across models, risk conditions, personas, and two- to five-player races. The audit shows that strong rule recall can coexist with weak state tracking and expected-payoff calculation. Providing verified arithmetic and changing the response representation can also change later actions, even when the game rules stay fixed. Across seven tested model endpoints, aggregate rates hide large differences in action sequences, responses to opponents, and responses to race position. Patterns across the tested three- to five-player races are also model-specific rather than a single effect of adding competitors. These results show why multi-agent AI-race simulations need validity checks and trajectory-level analysis before their outputs are described as strategic, human-like, or safety-aware. Our findings are exploratory and apply only to the tested models, prompts, and decoding settings.

Phu Hoa Pham, Duy Minh Dao Sy, Trung Kiet Huynh +9

Ho Chi Minh City University of Science Vietnam National University Ho Chi Minh City (VNU-HCM) Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam · Ho Chi Minh City University of Technology (HCMUT) Vietnam National University Ho Chi Minh City (VNU-HCM) Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam · Vrije Universiteit Brussel Université Libre de Bruxelles Brussels, Belgium +1

LLM Agent Evaluation AI Agent Safety Multi-Agent LLMs

Aug 2, 2026cs.CR

CallScreenBench: Benchmarking On-Device Models as Phone Secretaries

Language models small enough to run on a handset, quantized to a few bits, are increasingly capable of acting for their user, making on-device task automation newly plausible. One such task is answering the phone. A phone secretary takes an unknown inbound call on its owner's behalf. Unlike the agents evaluated by most benchmarks, it has no task to complete and no cooperative user: the caller holds the goal, may be an adversary, and must be judged from the opening turn with no oracle. What matters is not task success, but whether the owner would endorse how their proxy handled the call. We present CallScreenBench, which scores this setting on five quality dimensions. Each dimension is printed beside the counter-metric that bills it and is never averaged into a single number. We also report a guardedness profile for a toolless proxy that holds no credentials and calls no tools. Across six on-device models (0.6-4B parameters, 4-bit quantization), quality scales with capability, but triage does not. The appearance that it does is an artifact of measurement. Scripted degenerate agents supply the missing floors: after correcting for them, the number of model pairs whose triage performance separates falls from 11 of 15 to zero at the preregistered operating point. An agent that simply hangs up and echoes the caller also scores perfect message fidelity. We report which of our own metrics these floors defeat and declare no pass/fail threshold.

Simiao Ren

On-Device Language Model Inference LLM Agent Evaluation AI Agent Benchmarks AI Agent Safety Benchmarks

Aug 2, 2026cs.LG

Who Belongs in the Eval Set? A Capability-Taxonomy-Driven Pipeline for Curating Regression Eval Sets in Agent-Extensibility Platforms

Platform teams hosting agent-extensibility surfaces face a regression-economics paradox: every onboarding customer ships an evaluation set tuned to their domain, but the platform's regression set must live under a hard query-count ceiling bounded by release cadence. To our knowledge, no published industrial pipeline addresses this platform-side curation problem: existing evaluation frameworks are customer-side, and benchmark-compression work treats benchmarks as fixed pools rather than streams of incoming sets. We describe a capability-taxonomy-driven curation pipeline applied to declarative agents with custom actions in Microsoft 365 Copilot. It takes an agent specification and a customer's eval set as input, projects each query into a platform-owned capability taxonomy, and outputs per-query decisions (admit, drop, swap, or human review), under the philosophy that a healthy regression set is the minimal set of queries capturing the maximal spread of capability signatures -- distinct combinations of capabilities a query exercises together. Three components instantiate this: a classifier producing per-(query, capability) verdicts via a hybrid of deterministic specification-based extraction and large-language-model (LLM) semantic inference; an Invocation Quality (IQ) rater scoring how thoroughly a query exercises each capability, so a new query sharing a signature with an existing entry can still be recognized as a better test and displace it; and a consolidator comparing incoming queries against the regression set on coverage and quality through a rule-based decision cascade, backed by a conservative curator that only suggests evictions. The mechanism is taxonomy-agnostic and applies to any regression eval-set curation problem with a typed capability taxonomy, including taxonomies that evolve in response to the very evidence the pipeline surfaces.

Tezan Sahu, Aritra Das, Pankaj Mittal +1

Microsoft Hyderabad, India · Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee Roorkee, India

Benchmark Construction LLM Agent Evaluation AI Agent Benchmarks Automated Evaluation

Aug 1, 2026cs.AI

Tracing the Cascade: A Topology-Aware Evaluation Framework for Scientific Agent Hallucinations

Large language model (LLM) agents are increasingly deployed in scientific research, where reliability is critical and the underlying knowledge is densely interconnected. In such settings, hallucinations are particularly damaging: a single erroneous claim on a foundational concept can propagate through multi-step reasoning and corrupt entire trajectories. Existing hallucination benchmarks largely operate at the surface level, treating facts in isolation and relying on uniform accuracy metrics that ignore this topological structure. We address this gap with SCHEMA, the first evidence-grounded, topology-aware evaluation framework for hallucinations in scientific agents. SCHEMA automatically constructs scientific concept graphs from benchmark seeds and literature evidence, synthesizes graph-grounded tasks spanning claim verification, multi-hop reasoning, open-ended explanation, and experimental code generation, and evaluates agents with two complementary diagnostics. A trajectory hallucination pipeline audits intermediate reasoning at scale via a topology-weighted severity score, while a multi-agent counterfactual attribution module pinpoints the causal mechanism behind selected failures. SCHEMA reveals that hallucinations concentrate at a small set of highly connected knowledge hubs, and that final-answer accuracy decouples from trajectory honesty; models often reach correct conclusions through structurally flawed reasoning. These results indicate that for high-stakes scientific applications, terminal accuracy alone is an insufficient signal of agent reliability, motivating mechanism-level evaluation grounded in knowledge topology. Code is available at https://github.com/circles-post/SCHEMA.

Xinshun Feng, Ziqi Miao, Lijun Li +1

Shanghai Artificial Intelligence Laboratory Shanghai, China

AI Agents for Scientific Discovery Hallucination in Language Models LLM Agent Evaluation LLM Hallucination Detection

Jul 31, 2026cs.AI

Measuring Cross-Task Behavioral Consistency in Language Model Agents

Agent evaluation relies almost entirely on outcome metrics such as success rate, which capture whether an agent succeeds but not how consistently it behaves. We argue that behavioral consistency across tasks is a distinct and measurable property, and we introduce the Behavioral Consistency Metric (BCM) to quantify it. BCM trains a model to predict task success from behavioral features of agent execution traces, derives a per-trajectory feature-attribution vector, and measures the mean pairwise similarity of these vectors within an agent system. Across roughly 9,000 trajectories from six language model agents on software engineering tasks, our central finding is that cross-task and within-task consistency are distinct axes that can diverge: some systems are locally reproducible, behaving similarly on repeated attempts at one task, yet globally fragmented, with no stable strategy across different tasks, while others are consistent at both scales. Prior work measures only same-task reproducibility and so cannot observe this separation. We further find that consistency is not reducible to success rate, since systems with comparable success can differ sharply in consistency, and that the frontier-versus-open-source consistency gap persists under a within-task control that holds task difficulty constant. We position BCM as a process-level reliability signal that complements outcome metrics, and we are explicit about the conditions under which it is meaningful.

Amritesh Banerjee, Pranil Raichura

University of Massachusetts Amherst · Mantis AI Research (MIT CSAIL)

AI Agent Reliability Software Engineering Agents LLM Agent Evaluation LLM Agent Reliability

Jul 31, 2026cs.AI

ExtractBench: A Benchmark for Schema-Guided Enterprise Document Extraction

Enterprise workflows increasingly rely on agents for \emph{schema-guided extraction}: given a document and a user-defined schema, the agent faithfully follows the schema to produce the correct output with source evidence as grounding metadata. We present ExtractBench, a benchmark for schema-guided extraction and, to our knowledge, the first to score value accuracy, record completeness at scale, grounding, and measured cost together. The evaluation system contains 4,869 pages across 370 enterprise documents, 8 business domains, and 67 document types, with clear tags differentiating their challenge scenarios. The scalable schema and ground-truth curation pipeline combines independent-system agreement for real documents, known values for synthetic lists, and human verification for forms. We report order-insensitive value F1 for value accuracy, plus two grounding metrics for source traceability: word- and page-level F1. Commercial VLMs perform well on short documents but often truncate record lists on long ones, while coding agents retain higher accuracy at much higher cost. LlamaExtract Agentic Plus ranks first on all three metrics, with accuracy comparable to coding agents at a fraction of the cost. Dataset and evaluation code are available on HuggingFace and GitHub.

Boyang Zhang, Adrian Lyjak, Eli Stewart +2

LLM Grounding LLM Agent Evaluation Document Information Extraction

Jul 31, 2026cs.AI

AgentStream: How Well Do Self-Evolving LLM Agents Perform Under Streaming Tasks?

Large language model (LLM) agents can self-evolve by continually improving from their own accumulated experience. However, existing studies predominantly adopt independent evaluation. Consequently, the behavior of self-evolving agents in realistic streaming settings, where agents adapt to diverse and complex task streams, remains poorly understood. To address this gap, we introduce AgentStream, a unified framework that evaluates self-evolving agents spanning diverse evolution components by organizing agentic benchmarks into a configurable task stream and instantiating the \texttt{Isolated}, \texttt{Sequential}, and \texttt{Interleaved} streaming scenarios at test time, which progressively vary the scope and domain composition of the stream. Over these scenarios, we combinatorially evaluate five representative self-evolving methods across three frontier foundation models, disentangling how model capability, method architecture, and streaming scenario jointly shape self-evolution. Our results show that self-evolution reliability varies across streaming scenarios, the benefit of self-evolution is gated by model capability and is non-monotonic in model strength, and no single method dominates across models and scenarios. These findings offer concrete guidance for selecting self-evolving methods across models and streaming scenarios. Overall, we advocate that self-evolving agents should be evaluated under realistic task streams rather than isolated single-task settings.

Dong Yan, Jian Liang, Dapeng Hu +4

School of Artificial Intelligence, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences · Microsoft · Institute of Automation, Chinese Academy of Sciences +1

LLM Agent Evaluation AI Agent Benchmarks LLM Agent Reliability Self-Evolving Agents

Jul 31, 2026cs.AI

AgentHPOBench: A Benchmark For Evaluating LLM Agents as Sequential Hyperparameter Optimizers

As LLMs evolve from code completion systems into autonomous scientific agents, evaluating their ability to conduct experiments has become increasingly important. Existing benchmarks typically focus on static code generation, paper replication, or final answer correctness, but do not directly assess whether agents can interpret experimental evidence and use it to guide subsequent hyperparameter decisions. To address this gap, we introduce AgentHPOBench, a sequential benchmark comprising 30 executable machine learning tasks across seven research categories. Each task begins with a validated baseline run, after which an agent performs several sequential interventions. At each step, the agent observes the accumulated configurations, metrics, and logs before proposing the next valid configuration. We evaluate 12 widely used agents and conventional HPO baselines under a unified protocol. The results show that current agents exhibit measurable experimental optimization ability across domains, but still face clear limitations in sustained iterative refinement, complex log diagnosis, and consistent progress toward reported reference performance.

Tianyu Huai, Tingshuo Fan, Xinchi Chen +5

Shanghai Innovation Institute · East China Normal University · OpenMOSS +1

LLM Agent Evaluation AI Agent Benchmarks Autonomous Experimentation Hyperparameter Optimization