Workflows

AI co-scientists could accelerate computational research, but over a long-running study the workflow also has to stay inspectable, resumable and reproducible, which requires persistent computational state and provenance. Here we present OpenAI4S, an open-source scientific research agent built around the principle of \emph{Code as Action, Science as Sessions}. OpenAI4S combines a persistent computing runtime with research-session management: orchestration is handled through structured tool calls, while scientific actions are represented as complete code cells executed in persistent Python and R kernels. An append-only Action Ledger, per-cell execution records, versioned artifacts, environment records, and workspace checkpoints preserve how results were produced and support session recovery, branching, and extension. Configurable sandboxing, permission controls, and code and trajectory screening provide complementary safeguards. We evaluate OpenAI4S on 36 research scenarios spanning retrosynthesis, molecular dynamics, protein binder design, protein mutation, catalyst screening, and mineral spectroscopy, measuring scientific task accuracy, workflow completeness, and reproducibility of the resulting repositories. OpenAI4S achieves an overall score of 7.83, compared with 5.7--6.4 for a general-purpose coding harness evaluated with three frontier models, with the largest gains on long-horizon and computation-intensive workflows. These results suggest that integrating persistent execution with session-level provenance can improve the reliability of AI-assisted scientific workflows. Environment specification and full rerunnability remain weak for every evaluated system, ours included, so reproducibility is still an open problem for scientific agents. The system is available under the MIT license at \href{https://github.com/PKU-YuanGroup/OpenAI4S}{github.com/PKU-YuanGroup/OpenAI4S}.

We aim to characterise the value of artificial intelligence in the workplace. Current studies largely measure this value in terms of the current automation capabilities and public adoption of AI. However, such metrics ignore the greater impacts of human--agent collaboration in transforming the nature of work. To account for this, we must expand the scope of our analysis beyond atomised tasks of today, and instead focus on how AI can augment entire workflows of the future. To ground this analysis, we establish a precise definition of AI augmentation comprising six conditions, spanning durable net value, meaningful human control, accountability and recovery, and long-term human development through learning, career pathways, and job purpose. We elaborate on these conditions and apply the framework in a case study of AI-mediated social surveys. We conclude by outlining how organisations, researchers, and government leaders can use this framework to make sense of the future of work.

Repository-level repair requires not only correct patches but also inspectable records that explain how issue requirements are translated into code changes and post-edit evidence. We contribute THEMIS, a stage-aware repair workflow that externalizes this requirement-to-repair process through semantic interpretation, a runtime requirement-code graph, graph-derived Developer guidance, retained repair rationale and patches, and post-edit audit records. A retrospective audit of 300 SWE-bench Lite cases demonstrates that these artifacts provide broad support for cross-stage inspection: a complete Developer rationale is available for 288 cases, and 214 cases (71.3%) retain a complete audited field set connecting the selected stages. The retained records further enable systematic measurement of cross-stage correspondence: target symbols recur in 62.6% of Developer rationales and in 62.8% of patches, rising to 75.8% when related symbols are included. In a paired 100-case comparison, the relational workflow resolves 19 cases versus 9 for the direct same-input condition; because the two conditions also differ in Analyzer output, graph-derived distillation, and Judge records, we report this as preliminary, workflow-level evidence rather than a causal effect of the graph component. Together, these results show that THEMIS makes otherwise implicit requirement-to-repair transitions inspectable, enabling systematic examination of how repair decisions persist, align, and evolve across stages.

Sports data analysts translate domain questions into insights by combining computation with sport-specific domain expertise. Large language models ease programming, but prompt-to-report workflows may obscure decisions and evidence. We present AI Soccer Analyst, a mixed-initiative system with revisable stages: Data Understanding, Problem Definition, Structured Planning, Execution, Evidence-Grounded Reporting, and Interaction and Refinement. A formative study with five analysts first informed design goals for automation, verifiability, human control, and accessibility. Subsequently, a task-based evaluation with 16 participants combined system logs, retained artifacts, ratings, and open responses; 33 of 48 tasks met the operational completion criteria. Exploratory tests supported favorable participant perceptions of completed-task output quality, task achievement, reliability, and verifiability after Holm correction. Interaction records showed domain knowledge emerging through clarification, planning, and refinement. These findings position stage-aware human-AI collaboration as a practical approach for producing inspectable, revisable, and verifiable analyses while retaining domain-expert involvement in consequential decisions.

Sustained deployment of generative AI agents requires more than isolated task success. Agents must remain useful across repeated interactions, changing conditions, and dependencies on people within shared workflows, especially as technical, human, and operational disruptions accumulate over time. We propose operational resilience and considerate participation as two complementary aspects of evaluating such agents: the former captures how agents recover from blocked work while preserving progress and communicating their limits, and the latter captures how their adaptation accounts for affected people, role boundaries, and the surrounding workflow. Yet both remain underexplored under accumulating challenge. We study 120 simulated healthcare trajectories across two generative AI models and twelve stakeholder-derived tasks under light, medium, and heavy challenge. We compare textual action plans, prompted internal assessments, and quantitative structured workload and affect reports to examine how agent behavior and reported state change as challenge accumulates. Regarding operational resilience, agents shift from self-directed recovery toward greater human dependence, while reporting increasing workload and negative affect in structured reports but seldom expressing strain in textual responses. Regarding considerate participation, agents broaden from task-focused adaptation toward task reframing, attention to others, role-boundary adjustment, and wider coordination, with distinct patterns across actions and internal assessments. From these findings, we derive five deployment dilemmas involving persistence, attention, role boundaries, state disclosure, and escalation that require stakeholder specification, further informing technical implications for learning, situated evaluation, and embodied adaptation.

Agentic LLM workflows consist of sequences of model turns interleaved with tool interactions, so their end-to-end completion time depends not only on inference speed but also on when ready turns are released. Most runtimes release each turn immediately upon readiness. Under contention, this eager release policy can accumulate released but unfinished work; once submitted, those turns can no longer be reordered by the workflow-level policy, increasing tail latency. We present a tail-risk-aware turn release scheduling method that jointly decides which ready turn to release next and how much released but unfinished work to maintain. The method uses a mean--Conditional Value-at-Risk (CVaR) objective to capture the evolving tail risk of unfinished workflows, incorporates online estimates of turn work when prioritizing ready turns, and adapts the released work budget to observed queue pressure. We evaluate the method using real agent execution traces from software engineering tasks across multiple LLMs and workflow arrival rates. The method performs comparably to eager release under light load and substantially reduces the P95 of workflow flow time under contention, achieving up to a $3.50\times$ speedup.

Scientific workflow management (WMSs) systems automate execution, yet orchestrate using fixed, hand-tuned rules. LLM agents promise more autonomous orchestration, but it remains unclear where to introduce agentic reasoning, how to bound its risk, and when it actually helps. We present Avatar, an actor-based architecture comprising an orchestrator, an executor, and a provenance monitor. Each actor's decision policy is pluggable (rule-based or LLM-backed) via a single adapter-validated action catalog, so conventional and agentic control run on the same core across different WMSs. We present an implementation using the Academy framework and evaluate Avatar across three workloads. We observe that Avatar's rule mode reproduces native execution, with a single unchanged core running all three. Moreover, LLM-backed Avatar reports a reduction of compute wastage by $55\%$ and cuts GPU-busy time by $40\%$. Overall, we envision Avatar as a step toward workflow systems that reason about their own orchestration rather than follow pre-fixed rules.

Animation and VFX pre-production review requires teams to translate loosely specified creative intent--briefs, evolving specifications, heterogeneous references, and verbal decisions--into revisions that junior artists can execute without repeated clarification. In practice, criteria drift across iterations, review judgments lose their evidential basis, and the reasoning behind a request rarely survives the senior-junior handoff. We contribute a design framework for intent-evidence-action alignment: intent is articulated into a shared project record, judgments are anchored to grounded evidence, and authorized decisions are converted into clear revision tasks tied directly to reference notes. We instantiate this framework in MOONWALK, a professional pre-production review system comprising a shared intent record, reference/specification anchoring, structured work-in-progress comparison, and supervisor-authorized action planning. In this workflow, AI handles administrative coordination--flagging missing context and organizing notes--while artists retain full creative direction. An in-studio study with professional practitioners compares MOONWALK with a chat-only (chatbot) interface using matched production materials, while participants' existing workflows provide a retrospective ecological baseline. Results indicate stronger intent alignment, decision traceability, and checklist executability, while also showing that aesthetic authority and final prioritization must remain with practitioners. The evaluation establishes the value of the integrated structured workflow over unstructured conversational AI chatbot. Code: https://github.com/Akinesia112/Moonwalk/tree/english-version

Artificial intelligence in recruitment has shifted the object being automated from profile pairs and ranked lists to multi-stage workflows that retrieve evidence, compare candidates, and support or execute actions. This systematized narrative review traces that development from bilateral retrieval and behavioral ranking through neural person--job matching, large language model (LLM) components, and tool-using recruiting agents. Using a purposive search and coding protocol updated through 23 July 2026, plus targeted updates through 2 September 2026, we organize 40 representative works with supporting industrial and legal sources. This synthesis is not a prevalence estimate. We analyze three coupled transitions: from similarity to reciprocal suitability, from a model to a compound workflow, and from offline prediction to evidence- and productivity-aligned evaluation. Across document understanding, retrieval, ranking, assessment, interviewing, sourcing, and human handoff, we distinguish field-, pair-, list-, case-, trajectory-, and outcome-level evidence. Persistent gaps arise because behavioral labels confound exposure, preference, and qualification; private and synthetic data limit external validity; final-output scores conceal pipeline failures; and, within the coded set, privacy is not directly evaluated and no row jointly evaluates utility, fairness, privacy, and security. These observations describe the coded set rather than the field as a whole. We therefore introduce a staged mapping from evaluation evidence to the strongest defensible claim, together with an agenda for reciprocal, evidence-grounded, temporally controlled, selective, and auditable systems. Progress should be judged by whether workflows retrieve the right evidence, preserve uncertainty, support contestable decisions, and improve outcomes under explicit cost and risk constraints.

Making science computable requires representations of both scientific knowledge and the physical world in which scientific claims are tested. A computable representation of the physical laboratory is established through typed research objects, capability-bound operations and a compositional workflow algebra. It provides the physical-world counterpart to machine-readable knowledge, expressing workflows as programs over evolving laboratory states with explicit dependencies, decisions, iteration and concurrency. The representation was implemented in a modular agentic robotic laboratory by binding formal operations to executable Function Skills. For diverse scientific intents, capability-relative workflows were generated, while stateful simulation propagated object transformations and verified operation preconditions and laboratory constraints before dispatch. The proposed representation and its engineering framework jointly establish a general computational interface between agent reasoning and capability-bound physical transformations, providing a foundation for end-to-end autonomous scientific discovery.

Process mining (PM) provides a powerful framework for discovering and optimizing operational processes from event data. However, the efficacy of PM techniques is strictly predicated on the availability of structured event logs. Thus far, event logs have often been laboriously created by domain and process mining experts. This costly effort causes large portions of organizational knowledge, including incident tickets, manuals, and textual reports, to remain underutilized. We address this bottleneck by investigating the efficacy of Large Language Models (LLMs) as automated data translators. We propose a scalable framework that leverages LLMs as data translators to bridge the gap between unstructured textual resources and structured event data. We finetune LLMs on a newly created text-to-log dataset, demonstrating that the resulting models can extract high-fidelity event logs from unstructured resources. Our results show that this finetuning approach outperforms few-shot or zero-shot prompting by a large amount, highlighting finetuning as a necessary pre-condition for generating reliable event data. We conclude that our method provides a promising pipeline for making previously unused data available to process mining ecosystems, effectively expanding the possibilities of using PM to further investigate organizational workflows.

Despite the growing use of LLM-powered agents to solve multi-step tasks in complex environments, existing benchmarks rarely test state preservation, performance across languages, and application to realistic, grounded scenarios. To address these concerns, we present WorldBench: a comprehensive, multilingual benchmark of genuine, persona-grounded everyday workflows, where agents can act in a sandbox via structured actions. WorldBench comprises 1,600 tasks across seven languages and eight cultures, filtered and refined through feedback from human annotators with language- and culture-specific expertise. For evaluation, we extend metrics from previous works and introduce Constrained Task Success (CTS), which combines natural language instructions and testbeds to score task completion, minimal modification, and other complementary metrics through deterministic and LLM-as-a-Judge evaluations. Our experiments show that frontier models reach only 49.2% CTS, with all models demonstrating large gaps between correctness and environment preservation. We thereby show that current agents remain brittle in multilingual, agentic scenarios, especially for long-horizon tasks and under state-preservation constraints

Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable capabilities as powerful components in agentic systems, enabling sophisticated reasoning and complex task execution. However, current approaches to manually designing and optimizing agentic systems heavily rely on manual effort, limiting their adaptability and scalability. Recent work has explored the automated optimization of workflow designs. However, these approaches often overlook the crucial role of model capabilities and focus on single performance metrics, failing to address real-world deployment constraints. In this paper, we present AgentFactory, a framework that jointly optimizes both foundation models and workflow structures in agentic systems while considering multiple objectives including performance, cost, and efficiency. AgentFactory leverages advanced LLMs as optimizers to navigate the vast search space of possible configurations, employing a three-stage optimization pipeline to automatically discover effective combinations of fine-tuned models and optimized workflows. Through an iterative optimization process, our framework systematically explores and evaluates different agentic system designs, adapting to task-specific requirements while maintaining operational efficiency. We evaluate AgentFactory across eight benchmarks spanning five domains, including general reasoning, coding, mathematics, medicine, and finance. Our experiments demonstrate that AgentFactory consistently outperforms both manually designed methods and existing automated approaches, achieving an average improvement of 9.1% across all benchmarks, with particularly significant gains in domain-specific tasks (19.6% on MedQA and 18.7% on FinEval). These results establish AgentFactory as a promising approach for developing more capable and efficient agentic systems through automated optimization.

Agent revisions expose a fundamental correctness--efficiency trade-off during concurrent execution. Discarding ongoing work preserves latest-version correctness but wastes progress that may remain valid, whereas reusing prior work preserves efficiency but risks propagating stale state into outputs and tool effects. Existing recovery strategies resolve this trade-off in an imbalanced way with coarse-grained policies: they either favor efficiency by allowing potentially stale work to continue, or favor correctness by restarting the workflow or recomputing a linear suffix from the earliest conflict, thereby discarding unaffected progress. We present \textsc{Revise}, a validity-guided runtime for fine-grained recovery in structured agent workflows. When a revision arrives, \textsc{Revise} first intersects its delta with recorded data and control dependencies and propagates the resulting impact through the partially executed DAG to identify affected work. It then stops invalid work, preserves validity-established progress beyond the earliest conflict, and recomputes only the affected region. Incomplete provenance conservatively expands recovery, while reused results are revalidated before commit. Analysis of real coding-agent traces show online recovery opportunities: 118 sessions retain observable work before a queued later message is delivered; across 167 overlapping assistant responses, enqueue-to-completion overlap reaches 56.55~s at p95. Across 300 challenging revision/commit executions, \textsc{Revise} matches a latest-version oracle with no stale outputs or effects. On unmodified LangGraph and LLMCompiler applications using Qwen3-14B, it reduces model calls by 40.6--56.0% relative to full restart and by 31.3--43.6% relative to suffix recomputation. Under serving pressure, it further reduces revision-to-correct-completion tokens by 13.26% and improves SLO goodput by 3.07--5.43%.

Computer-use agents are emerging as a paradigm for agentic human-AI interaction, combining language reasoning with multi-modal interface grounding to operate GUIs. Yet their effectiveness for blind screen-reader users in real-world desktop workflows remains unclear. We present a three-week diary study with 8 blind users using OLLA, a screen-reader-accessible CUA prototype, collecting 1,258 commands across 12 applications with screenshots, UI trees, model responses, and action traces. We evaluate GPT-5 during deployment and re-execute the same commands with four additional models. GPT-5 achieved the highest success rate at 52.5%. Trace analysis reveals grounding, planning, constraint-tracking, and termination failures, while interviews reveal beyond-automation needs.

Translation students need to learn both how to use translation technologies and how to judge the choices those technologies make available. This article presents LoopCAT, an Apache-2.0-licensed, local-first computer-assisted translation environment co-created with OpenAI Codex using GPT-5.5 and GPT-5.6, and proposes a framework connecting workflow competence, evaluative judgement, and technological agency. The account draws on repository history, implementation inspection, and the verification records of an identified development build. LoopCAT combines local project storage, translation memories, terminology, quality assurance, document exchange, and optional connections to local or hosted AI services. Its English, Catalan, and Turkish interface catalogs also make the application itself available as teaching material: students can translate English UI strings into another language, review the existing automatically generated target drafts, import their revisions, and test the interface. We organize these opportunities around four forms of participation: operating a workflow, evaluating outputs, inspecting and configuring mechanisms, and making or defending a bounded intervention. A six-session sequence, a UI-localization assignment, a placeholder example, and an assessment rubric specify how teachers could use the framework. The paper separates implemented capabilities from proposed educational benefits; it reports no new student-learning outcomes. It distinguishes the latest package checks from earlier regression evidence and sets out a protocol for classroom evaluation. LoopCAT provides an inspectable setting for teaching how translation decisions interact with data, interfaces, and software rules. Whether these activities improve judgement, transfer, or participation remains an empirical question.

Agent evaluations often use one benchmark to choose a workflow and then search for task types where its advantage weakens, so both conclusions are selected from the same data. We introduce Selection-Aware Semantic Stress Testing (\SASST{}), which learns a task reweighting from pre-execution features on discovery tasks and evaluates the same paired comparison on separate confirmation tasks. The protocol checks support and stability, uses joint bounds for all planned claims, and can return no claim. We prove conditional asymptotic validity under stated cluster assumptions. A forty-cluster audit finds Gaussian undercoverage and conservative Bonferroni $t$ bounds. In one 480-episode $τ$-bench study, a $3.75$ point discovery gain vanished on confirmation. A second-model study likewise confirmed neither a workflow benefit nor a stable stress rule.

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used in software development, but their use in complex hardware design remains limited. This gap stems from both the scarcity of public hardware training data and the fundamentally different methodologies used in hardware design. In particular, applying LLMs to hardware requires more than direct RTL generation: the model must understand module boundaries, inter-module connections, and verification requirements. In this paper, we present an LLM-based hardware development framework with hierarchical intermediate representations (IRs) and an end-to-end multi-agent workflow. The core idea is to provide an abstraction of hardware design to LLMs through two structured IRs: Architectural Sketch, which captures module topology and interconnection, and Operational Specification, which defines per-module functionality and interfaces. Our framework uses these IRs to decompose a complex design into sub-modules, specify the per-block functionality, and derive how each module should be tested and verified. We incorporate a multi-agent debug loop in the framework, allowing agents to get the error feedback and control the debug details such as the signals to be probed for simulation. We evaluate our framework on Verilog-Eval benchmark, achieving a pass@5 rate of 95.5%, which surpasses current state-of-the-art LLM generation frameworks. To better assess performance on complex, realistic designs, we introduce a new case study spanning applications from general-purpose processors to digital signal processing systems. Experimental results indicate that such complex designs exceed the capabilities of existing approaches, whereas our framework is the only one capable of producing functional end-to-end design. Our generated RTL follows all industry-standard design rules, is lint-clean, functionally correct and fully synthesizable.

Large Language Models (LLMs) offer new possibilities for scaling qualitative analysis, but existing applications often provide limited methodological transparency regarding how qualitative methods are translated into computational procedures. This paper presents an auditable and privacy-preserving computational operationalization of inductive and latent Thematic Analysis (TA). This paper first derives five design principles from the methodological requirements of TA and the conditions introduced by LLM-based inference: preserving interpretative context, maintaining traceable relationships between empirical material and analytical outputs, representing analytical constructs and reasoning explicitly, constraining LLM inference to interpretative tasks, and enabling privacy-preserving local deployment. Second, it presents a proof-of-concept for a two-phase workflow that operationalizes these principles by combining interpretative LLM inference with deterministic procedural control to generate codes, analytical justifications, themes, and theme descriptions while preserving explicit links to the source material. Third, it proposes an evaluation framework combining structural comparison with human-led TA and independent expert assessment of analytical quality. The evaluation is conducted on semi-structured Danish interview transcripts. and the results shows that the workflow produces code-level outputs with coverage broadly comparable to human annotations and highly rated analytical justifications, while generating a more compressed thematic structure characterized by fewer and broader themes. The findings demonstrate the feasibility of auditable LLM-supported TA through a modular workflow designed to scale to larger datasets, accommodate different LLMs, and support transfer across research domains, with domain adaptation primarily requiring adjustments to the prompting strategy.

Modern agent frameworks compose planners, tool agents, remote services, and shared specialists into runtime delegation graphs, but their revocation APIs still resemble token or subtree invalidation. When one delegation is withdrawn, the runtime must know which agents lose authority while independently authorized agents keep working. We study this authority consistency problem and introduce VERA (Verifiable Edge Revocation for Agents), a verifier-checkable revocation contract and API emitted by agent-runtime adapters as signed evidence. Under disjunctive authority, revoking edge e invalidates exactly T_intent(e,G) = reach(G) \ reach(G \ {e}), the agents whose every authorizing root path used e. Used as a contract, this target exposes two runtime failures: tree cascades over-revoke shared agents, while deployer-scoped cascades under-revoke cross-domain descendants. In a LangGraph framework-replt cells repeated 20 times yield 500compiled-framework traces and 2,000 valid signed delegation decisions; 13/25 cells contain runtime multi-parsharing and 8/25 contain cross-deployer shies 500/500 target proofs, preserves all320 alternate-parent shared-agent cases that tree cascade revokes, and rejects unauthorized signers and omission attacks. Baseline replay over 1,9that holder/node and tree-style targetscannot express this behavior. We further validate schema portability on A2A, AutoGen, and CrewAI artifacts: nine traces, including five executable Cregned delegation events that pass schema and signature checks.

As agentic systems evolve into complex multi agent orchestration workflows, there is a growing and critical need for systematic frameworks that measures an agent's behavioral consistency and determinism. In this paper, we introduce a formal evaluation methodology that is grounded in AgentGraph, a planner powered by a domain specific language that represents agent reasoning through a dynamically adjustable directed graph. We leverage this structural formalism and utilize graph traversal algorithms that exhaustively enumerate conversational paths, forming a comprehensive evaluation set that captures the agent's complete behavioral space. We then systematically replay these reproducible trajectories to compare observed outputs and state transitions against the intended DSL specification. To quantify reliability, we define novel metrics that measure response and trajectory determinism, structural adherence and semantic consistency across both exact replays and their linguistic variants. Our system's results demonstrate that agents configured using frameworks like AgentGraph and LangGraph with explicitly structured node transitions show superior determinism over agents that are not configured with controlled transitions.

Clinically relevant oncology information is distributed across heterogeneous, longitudinal documentation, creating substantial abstraction burden and requiring accurate attribution across specimens, tumors, biomarkers, and time points, while manual cancer-registry abstraction can require 27.2 minutes per case, highlighting the need for scalable methods that preserve clinical context while converting documentation into structured data. We evaluate an oncology information-extraction workflow in which OncoLens supplies multi-source, oncology-aware document selection, aggregation, and normalization from integrated EHRs, while the NimbleMind Multi-Agent System (nMAS) is a configurable oncology information-extraction workflow that extracts clinically relevant structured fields from fragmented oncology documentation. The extraction task uses a clinician-informed schema of 328 attributes spanning report metadata, diagnosis, staging, and cancer-type-specific information. nMAS separates clinician-defined field specifications from model execution and combines complexity-aware extraction, report-level consolidation, and source-grounded validation. The retrospective evaluation included 230 de-identified oncology documents from 40 patients and 418 clinician-reviewed document-field pairs containing 1,126 non-empty reference values. Evaluation focused on fields identified by clinicians as present in the source documents rather than exhaustively annotating all 328 schema fields. nMAS achieved a rank-weighted value-level precision of 82.6%, recall of 87.5%, and F1 of 85.0%, compared with an F1 of 66.4% for an independently implemented UMA-style MiniMax M2.5 comparator. These findings support the feasibility of using a configurable, source-grounded extraction workflow to convert fragmented oncology documentation into reusable structured data.

Multi-agent large language model (LLM) workflows have emerged as a powerful paradigm for solving complex, open-ended tasks through collaborative reasoning among specialized LLM agents, but they incur substantial operating costs due to repeated LLM invocations and long-horizon context accumulation. Existing cascade routing methods make one-shot, query-level decisions and cannot adapt to the dynamic, state-dependent nature of multi-step workflows, in which the right LLM at each step depends on evolving task progress, remaining task difficulty, and cost-efficiency requirements. We present ProgRouter, an online progress-guided routing framework that adaptively selects LLM agents across workflow steps to preserve task-solving quality while adhering to time and cost budgets. ProgRouter introduces a multi-view task progress scorer that combines coarse workflow outcome regimes with fine-grained signals on subtask completion, progress trends, and workflow state quality. Then, a dual-path task progress predictor and an adaptive meta-gating mechanism estimate the progress gain for each candidate routed LLM. ProgRouter makes online step-wise routing decisions that balance progress gain, task time budgets, and long-term operating cost efficiency. Experiments on HumanEval Plus, MBPP, MATH-500, and ASQA, spanning agentic code generation, mathematical reasoning, and retrieval-augmented long-form question answering, demonstrate that ProgRouter reduces the operating cost relative to key baselines while maintaining strong task-solving performance.

Scientific agents increasingly analyze data, execute code, and produce research artifacts, yet most benchmarks emphasize final answers, isolated programs, or a single domain. We introduce FrontierChallenge, a cross-domain benchmark comprising 300 end-to-end scientific workflows. In this paper, we release and evaluate 97 of these tasks, spanning quantum chemistry, molecular dynamics, materials characterization, analytical chemistry, life science, and electrochemistry/environment. Each task provides fixed inputs and specifies a bundle of required scientific deliverables. We evaluate twelve frontier models with three agent scaffolds. Pass Rate measures the fraction of tasks satisfying the full-completion criterion, while Avg. Score captures partial progress. Each of the best-performing configurations completed only 20 of the 97 released tasks, yielding a Pass Rate of 20.6%. Partial progress translated especially poorly into complete delivery in analytical chemistry and electrochemistry/environment: Avg. Scores reached 87.6 and 94.9, but the highest Pass Rates were only 4% and 0%. Among non-passing Claude Code trajectories, 75.5% still ended with language claiming completion. Complementary HDS6 process scores correlate strongly with task outcomes, supporting FrontierChallenge as a benchmark of Heavy Duty Solver capabilities. These findings show that neither high partial scores nor confident claims of completion reliably indicate that a scientific task has been fully delivered, highlighting the need to evaluate end-to-end workflow execution and the completeness of scientific deliverables together.

Large language models are increasingly expected to execute complex workflows whose success depends on maintaining interdependent constraints and producing artifacts that satisfy strict end-to-end verification. Yet successful execution experience is typically lost after a single run, forcing subsequent models to rediscover strategies and failure modes from scratch. We study whether such experience can instead be externalized and reused through EvoMap, where verifier-confirmed execution trajectories are consolidated into structured Gene. To evaluate this setting, we introduce the Long-Workflow Benchmark (LongWoF-Bench), comprising 778 machine-verifiable tasks across code generation, agent-environment synthesis, mathematical reasoning, and rule following. On the 252 tasks with verifier-confirmed Opus trajectories, evolved EvoMap Gene outperform Skill across all seven evaluated models by 8.7-15.5 percentage points, with the gains extending to consumer models from different model families. In contrast, reference-distilled Gene do not exhibit the same advantage, indicating that compact representation alone is insufficient and that Gene utility is closely associated with verified experience provenance. For Claude Opus, Gene reuse also completes 39 more tasks than Skill while reducing solve-time token consumption by 9.9%. Together, these results show that verified execution experience can be retained and shared as a reusable external resource, enabling models to improve long-workflow completion without repeatedly paying the full cost of experience discovery.

A growing body of literature measures the extent to which occupations are exposed to AI, yet existing measures capture where AI could perform tasks rather than whether workers have actually adopted it. We introduce a distinct tier of exposure, delegated exposure, which records whether a worker has committed a task to AI by embedding it into a structured workflow. We operationalize this concept through the Agentic Adoption Index (AAI), measuring how closely an occupation's tasks align with the agentic routines that practitioners have built and shared. Using semantic embeddings of roughly 888,000 agent skill specifications from public GitHub repositories, we compute their similarity to nearly 18,000 O*NET task statements and aggregate these scores to the occupational level. We present three main findings. First, the occupations where task delegation concentrates differ sharply from those identified as most vulnerable by pre-AI automation frameworks. Second, the AAI aligns more closely with measures of technical capability than with measures of current conversational LLM use. Third, for occupations requiring a bachelor's degree or less, the AAI increases alongside average wage levels; however, this relationship reverses for occupations requiring a master's degree or higher, where adoption declines among higher earners. These patterns replicate on an independently collected corpus of agent skills from the Manus Skills Marketplace. This lower adoption among highly educated, high-earning workers may reflect tasks that inherently resist advance specification or professional discretion over the pacing of workflow codification. Distinguishing these mechanisms will require longitudinal measurement.

We address the use of large language models (LLMs) to help discover Isabelle proofs. An Isabelle build establishes that the submitted theory is accepted, but not that an LLM changed only what the developer authorised. We present CAPRI, a contract-aware repair workflow in which Isabelle checks the proof and an independent checker enforces a machine-readable edit contract. Prompts, proposals, candidate repositories, diagnostics, verdicts, and hashes are retained for audit. We evaluate five workflows on twelve failed proofs from four developments, with three replicates per task and condition, giving 180 runs and 138 valid repairs. Of 144 terminal candidates accepted by Isabelle, six had modified protected text; all arose in iterative workflows that could edit a complete theory. A proof-body-only interface produced 29/36 valid repairs and no contract violations, compared with 31/36 for the corresponding full-theory workflow. One-shot repair produced 22/36, while a later prospectively frozen iterative workflow produced 32/36; these figures compare complete workflows rather than individual mechanisms. A separate post hoc OpenRouter campaign found no improvement in the designated Luna comparisons. A Sol configuration with matched demonstrations produced 33/36 repairs, compared with 29/36 in the frozen OpenAI Responses condition, but the difference was not statistically significant in a one-sided exact McNemar test ($p=0.0625$).

Agentic workflows are commonly evaluated by whether they reach the correct outcome. That is insufficient in institutional settings, where a correct action may rely on the wrong authority, an unsupported completion claim, or work made stale by a later change. We define governed execution as work whose decisions, completion, and response to change are supported by inspectable provenance. We present Matrix, a deterministic causal-state layer that records authority and fact dependencies, verifies completion evidence, and selectively invalidates affected work. Across controlled comparisons, governed and direct workflows often reached the same outcomes, but only the governed path consistently preserved governing evidence, refused unsupported closure, and limited recovery to dependent tasks. A role-separated transfer challenge then failed: a deterministically enforced completeness contract severely over-blocked synthetic packets produced outside its authoring context. These results do not establish Matrix as a general accuracy enhancer; they support its primary role as an institutional integrity layer for making agentic work auditable and independently verifiable.

Modernizing legacy Fortran is a problem of volume: the transformations are individually routine, but the codebases can be enormous, and across much of computational science the work simply goes undone. We propose an agentic workflow that takes this work on at production scale, and we set out to measure how far such delegation can reach. In this work, three prompt-specialized agent roles operate under a version-controlled specification that the agents themselves authored and revised, while humans hold a small number of gates. The arrangement is kept safe by an exact verification oracle inherited from the domain, and the boundary of safe delegation lies exactly where that oracle stops seeing. We apply the proposed workflow in a case study, converting the two-electron-integral routines of GAMESS (General Atomic and Molecular Electronic Structure System), a mature quantum-chemistry package with a 48-year development history, from fixed-form Fortran 77 to free-form Fortran 2008. The scope of this work was twelve source files, 56,448 lines, and 225 subroutines for computing electron repulsion integrals. The agents ran as three Claude Code roles in isolated worktrees, and the work spanned four Claude model generations. Because the GAMESS group ships a standard test suite whose printed energies its user community treats as canonical, we could adopt bit-for-bit reproduction of those energies as the merge criterion, where a deviation in the twelfth decimal place counts as a failure rather than drift. All twelve source files pass a 51-test validation battery comprising the 49 standard GAMESS tests and two additional calculations, and across 612 test runs the number of chemistry-relevant differences is zero, and every file also passes the Jenkins tests that are used for continuous integration.

AI agents are increasingly deployed for professional investment research, yet no benchmark captures the complexity of the full investor workflow. Existing benchmarks mainly target financial data extraction, a narrow slice that current models have largely saturated, while reference-based metrics and generic LLM-as-a-judge scoring fall short on the open-ended, long-form answers that real analyst queries demand. We introduce FrontierFinance, a fully open benchmark of 220 expert-crafted queries and 11,543 source-attributed rubrics spanning six crucial use cases across the full investor workflow. FrontierFinance is both broader and harder than existing public finance benchmarks. Evaluating frontier models and agent systems under a common harness restricted to publicly available data, we find that the tool harness, not the model alone, strongly shapes quality and efficiency; that Samaya's in-house system leads at 56.0%, ahead of the strongest frontier model (Claude Fable 5, 49.2%) at roughly 2.2x lower cost; and that the best open-weight model (Kimi K3, 46.4%) nearly matches the best proprietary model at 4.5x lower cost. Screening & Discovery and Sector, Industry & Macro remain the hardest use cases across all systems, where even the best systems reach only 33% and 39%. We make the dataset and grading code publicly available.

Mobile GUI agents remain brittle when deployed to applications absent from source training. We study novel-app generalization under a limited target interaction budget and without target demonstrations. We introduce CoAdapt-GUI, a test-time adaptation (TTA) framework that jointly adapts structured workflow context and policy from the agent's own target-app rollouts and rewards. The workflow context retains transferable procedures, failure modes, and verification rules while excluding app-bound source details. This separation allows reusable workflow knowledge to guide adaptation without transferring source-interface state. For policy adaptation, task-context-matched group-relative optimization updates a LoRA adapter on a frozen vision-language model. Across two unseen-app evaluations, CoAdapt-GUI reaches 45.0% on AndroidWorld-Generalization, compared with 37.5% for the reported Policy-Only TTA baseline, and raises AndroidWorld Plus performance from 38.6% to 52.9%. These results show that transfer-constrained workflow context provides substantial gains and that joint policy adaptation further improves held-out performance.

Self-evolving agents accumulate reusable skills by appending successful procedures and failure fixes. Over time, the same requirement is often restated in several branches, examples, and warnings, while common action sequences are copied rather than reused. The resulting skill becomes expensive to inject and difficult to maintain. Generic prompt compression is ill-suited to this setting because a skill is not a flat passage: its name and description define when it applies, its workflow controls execution, its tool and output contracts constrain validity, and rare exceptions may remain essential even when no sampled task activates them. Evaluation-guided compression can test these behaviors, but it introduces rollouts, cost, and dependence on the compression-time evaluation set. We present SkillZip, an evaluation-free method that compresses a skill by finding its shortest faithful structural explanation. The intuition is explain once, reference many: state a repeated rule once at the scope where it applies, factor a repeated action sequence into a shared procedure, and keep only the differences as explicit exceptions. We formalize this intuition as a typed minimum description-length objective over a skill contract and a residual, subject to a hard coverage constraint for every extracted trigger, workflow edge, tool requirement, obligation, and output field. The formulation provides simple sharing thresholds, preserves unique rare rules by construction, and supports efficient local updates. SkillZip has a one-shot mode with one structured extraction call and deterministic optimization, and a continual Zip-on-Write mode that integrates each self-evolution patch without replaying tasks or reparsing the full history. Through comprehensive experimental evaluations, we demonstrate the effectiveness and superiority of SkillZip in compression performance, generalizability, and cost overhead.

Model Cards and Data Cards have demonstrated the value of structured, human-readable documentation for machine learning artifacts, capturing their context, parameters, limitations, and intended use. However, these practices remain focused on static artifacts (the datasets and trained models themselves) while overlooking the workflow executions that produce, transform, and evaluate them. Such executions hold critical details about data preparation, parameter choice, runtime behavior, resource use, and intermediate transformations, precisely where bias, performance variation, and reproducibility gaps tend to originate. To close this gap, we introduce Workflow Cards: structured summaries that condense the machine-readable provenance data of a workflow execution into a form both humans and large language models (LLMs) can read and analyze. This paper has two main parts. First, it defines a Workflow Card template informed by a representative set of provenance questions that surface from the execution-level data missing from Model and Data Cards. Second, it evaluates how effectively LLMs use Workflow Cards to understand workflow executions compared with querying provenance databases through a schema-based interface. Results show that Workflow Cards provide execution-level information absent from existing card types, such as Model Cards and Data Cards, thereby filling an important documentation gap; and that Workflow Cards nearly double answer quality compared with schema-based querying, consistently across LLM-as-a-Judge and human assessments.

Quantitative language research often depends on long chains of computational steps, yet the logic connecting those steps usually remains buried in scripts. This makes analyses harder to inspect, share, and revise than they need to be. Focusing on quantitative syntax, we present QLWF, a visual workflow platform that turns natural-language research descriptions into executable workflows through an AI assisted five-stage pipeline. In this setting, reification makes the research logic visible as a workflow, while formalization gives that workflow deterministic execution semantics. The language model is used only during construction. Execution is handled by a fixed node library and engine, which keeps the resulting workflows reproducible. QLWF also supports incremental refinement, so saved workflows can be revised by changing only the parts that need to change rather than being rebuilt from scratch. To evaluate the approach, we build a 64-task benchmark called QL-Bench from the quantitative-syntax literature. Across three runs, QLWF produces structurally valid and executable workflows for every task and reaches a mean output-plausibility rate of 98.4%, well above the prompt-based baselines. On a separate 12-task lifecycle benchmark, this refinement process succeeds in every case and uses roughly one-third of the tokens required by full regeneration. The paper also releases the node library, benchmark, workflow templates, and platform as reusable resources for quantitative-syntax research.

Shared memory helps language-model agents reuse information across long workflows, yet relevant evidence may not be admissible for a particular agent or action. Because restrictions propagate through derivations, summaries can conceal private, poisoned, untrusted, or revoked sources, enabling unauthorized reads or unsafe actions. Existing approaches provide semantic retrieval, scoped access, or lineage tracking, but do not clearly separate hard authorization from graded trust or adapt evidence requirements to action risk. We introduce MAP-Graph, a provenance-aware memory layer that represents agents, sources, memories, claims, and actions in a typed execution graph. It traces ancestry, excludes permission-ineligible records, reranks eligible memories by semantic similarity and multiplicative path trust, and applies a risk-sensitive gate before action execution while retaining affected lineage for audit. On a controlled benchmark of 2,700 synthetic tasks per method across three domains, MAP-Graph achieves 94.96% overall task success, 72.70% exact decision accuracy, and 90.22% in the clean setting, where success requires a correct \textsc{Allow} rather than a safe intervention. Ablations isolate the roles of permission filtering, path trust, and action gating, while transfer tests with two additional backbones preserve the exact-decision and access-control advantages. These results support provenance as an operational control signal, rather than only post-hoc audit metadata, within the evaluated setting.

Earth observation (EO) agents construct scientifically valid tool workflows and ground their conclusions in current geospatial evidence. This is challenging because EO workflows are constrained by sensing semantics, product dependencies, spatial and temporal compatibility, and parameter requirements. Existing agents often search a broad operation space for each query, while recent self-evolving systems do not fully organize heterogeneous EO trajectories into reusable knowledge across different decision levels. To solve this problem, we present GeoForge, a training-free, self-evolving framework that transforms completed trajectories into a structured nonparametric execution state. GeoForge constrains the operation space according to the sensing context, then retrieves a task-conditioned prior from three complementary memories. Workflow Graph Memory captures global operation order, Action-Level Experiences provide local corrections, and the Adapted Skill Standard Operating Procedure preserves procedural and data constraints. The retrieved prior guides tool execution, while current observations remain the basis of the final answer. After each task, a safety-gated distillation process converts grounded trajectories into reusable execution knowledge for future retrieval. This execution, distillation, and reuse loop improves planning without updating the backbone LLM. Experiments on multiple geospatial benchmarks demonstrate that GeoForge consistently improves both task accuracy and tool-use trajectory quality across diverse LLM backbones, while substantially reducing tool-planning and reasoning errors for most LLMs.

Agentic workflows have become an important abstraction for building reliable LLM-based automation systems by organizing large language models (LLMs), tools, and control logic into explicit execution structures. However, constructing high-quality agentic workflows remains largely manual and requires substantial domain expertise. Recent studies have explored automatic agentic workflow generation from historical task-solving records, but they mainly produce LLM-centric workflows, where real tool executions are abstracted and simulated by LLM nodes, limiting the usability and stability of generated workflows. To address these limitations, we propose FlowScout, an execution-guided framework for generating tool-integrated agentic workflows from historical task-solving records. Specifically, FlowScout represents an agentic workflow as a directed graph composed of LLM nodes, tool-calling nodes, and dependency edges. It first mines a common tool coordination skeleton from historical records to construct an initial workflow, and then refines the workflow topology through Monte Carlo tree search guided by execution feedback. We evaluate FlowScout on four representative task domains and compare it with three baselines, i.e., PM4Py, ReAct and AFlow. Experimental results show that agentic workflows generated by FlowScout improve tool invocation correctness by at least 92.69% and execution quality by at least 17.66% over the baselines, while achieving lower performance variation across repeated runs.

Verified code generation asks a large language model (LLM) to generate both an executable program and a machine-checkable proof that the program meets a formal specification, promising software that is correct by construction. The de facto workflow decouples the two halves of the problem: first synthesize a program, then attempt to prove it correct. We observe that this sequential pipeline can be both ineffective and inefficient in practice. A program generated without anticipating its proof can be subtly incorrect or structurally difficult to verify, forcing the LLM into brittle repair loops that alternate between patching the code and patching the proof. Inspired by Dijkstra's view that a program and its correctness argument should be developed hand in hand, we propose $P^3$, an LLM-based agentic workflow that first derives a unified program-and-proof plan from the specification, then elaborates the implementation and proof scaffold under this shared plan. To evaluate verified code generation in realistic settings, we further introduce Lean4Commit0, a repository-derived, library-level benchmark built by extracting core APIs from real-world software repositories and translating their requirements, including relational specifications across APIs, into Lean tasks. Using four frontier LLM backends, we evaluate $P^3$ on Verina, AlgoVeri, and our Lean4Commit0 benchmark, where it achieves the highest solve rate in every benchmark--model setting. Compared with the stronger baseline, it improves solve rates by 4.6--11.2 percentage points and reduces per-task API cost by up to roughly 40% and wall-clock time by up to roughly 37% on the difficult subset of each benchmark. A targeted ablation further shows gains of 3.3--8.3 points over implementation-only planning, isolating the benefit of planning the program and proof jointly.

Large multi-call LLM systems pose a scientific problem that query-level routing does not capture: the value of a model depends on where it enters a dependent computation and on the deployment that surrounds that call. Existing routers typically decide \emph{where} to spend a stronger model while treating the benefit of the substitution itself as known. We separate these two decisions through a predicate-action factorization and evaluate it in controlled solve-merge-verify workflows spanning 8-64 solve calls and four three-tier model ladders. The resulting evidence reveals a consistent principle beneath apparently conflicting outcomes. On numeric frequency counting, all-strong reduces RMSE from 4.818 to 1.538 in the Mixed Qwen/GPT ladder, whereas the average Qwen-only ordering reverses. Input-matched interventions further show that the same medium-to-strong action has sharply different value across roles and scales. A semantic task-and-contract shift reverses the Mixed ordering again, while allocation ablations distinguish useful sparse placement from under-coverage and indiscriminate escalation. Together, these results establish model substitution as a deployment-conditioned action rather than a property implied by a tier label, and they provide a practical sequence for large-scale workflow routing: calibrate the action, resolve its role-conditioned effect, and then optimize its placement.

To anticipate socio-technical risks from AI agents, organizations need taxonomies to classify them. However, existing AI risk taxonomies focus on broad risks and do not capture job-specific risks introduced by agents. To address this gap, we make three main contributions. First, we developed a multi-layer framework from a literature review of AI agents. The framework models three core components and their interactions: agents, goals, and environment. Second, we embedded this framework in a structured prompt and applied it to descriptions of 2,078 job tasks from the O*NET database, producing 8,356 risk scenarios labeled by severity and deployment mode (automation or augmentation). We validated these scenarios with 45 workers across 10 job roles and an independent LLM judge, confirming their plausibility and alignment with job tasks. Finally, we extended an existing taxonomy to create a 15-category taxonomy of workplace AI agent risks that covers all our risk scenarios. Our analysis highlights four findings. First, augmentation is not inherently safe because overreliance on agents can gradually erode workers' skills and oversight. Second, Erroneous Agent Actions accounts for the largest share of risk scenarios and has the highest concentration of severe risks. Many arise at the human-agent boundary. Third, automation is associated mainly with organizational risks, while augmentation is associated mainly with risks to workers. Fourth, workers found our taxonomy easier to use for a risk classification task than two other taxonomies and preferred it in 64% of non-tied comparisons with a recent generative AI risk taxonomy. These findings show that workplace AI agent risks do not arise from agents alone; they also depend on how people work with agents and how agents are deployed. Safer workplaces require not only safer agents but also carefully designed human-AI agent collaboration.

Enterprise AI coding assistants incur substantial inference spend, and naive token-cost minimization often fails to reduce end-to-end cost once retries, escalations, and developer wait time are included. We present Task-to-Model Optimization (T2MO), a data-driven methodology for optimizing model selection in production coding workflows. We treat each developer session as a task that can be discovered, classified, graded for difficulty, benchmarked in a production-like harness, and routed to the cheapest model able to complete it within quality and latency constraints. The framework is a nine-stage pipeline spanning telemetry instrumentation, taxonomy discovery, difficulty grading, benchmark construction, candidate evaluation, optimal mix derivation, forecasting and version planning, staged routing deployment, and continuous governance. Unlike token-centric routing rules, our objective is cost per completed task, with failure escalation priced in explicitly. We show that this expected-completion-cost objective weakly dominates token-cost minimization under escalation, and we derive the routing boundary, the minimum pass rate a cheaper model must reach on a given cell to be worth deploying. Decisions are organized as a two-level hierarchy of task category difficulty tier, and per-cell displacement opportunities are aggregated into a traffic-weighted savings waterfall that ranks replacement candidates by realized dollar impact. The framework supports developer guidance, spend forecasting, and a staged transition from static policies to shadow-mode classifiers, verified cascades, and ultimately an intelligent router. We describe the methodology, optimization objective, evaluation protocol, and governance loop in a form suitable for production deployment and future empirical study.

We introduce the workbook time machine, a pipeline that automatically creates benchmarks evaluating the ability of language models to create derived objects in spreadsheets (formulas, charts, pivot tables, and conditional formatting). Applied to public workbook corpora, it produces wtmcorpus--a collection of (input workbook, output workbook, query) triples spanning four artifact types and varying complexity. From this corpus we curate wtmbench, a 150-task evaluation benchmark with queries at three levels of specificity. We evaluate existing spreadsheet manipulation agents and baselines on wtmbench across artifact types, step complexity, and instruction granularity. Our evaluations show that query specificity, agent orchestration, and interface API used to control spreadsheets play a big role in LLM performance on Excel tasks.

Identifying a meaningful quantum speedup requires more than matching a classical problem to a familiar quantum primitive: the claim must preserve the task, respect access and output models, expose required promises, and remain within a defensible complexity scope. We present QuantumMind, an auditable agentic workflow for generating and conservatively screening quantum-acceleration hypotheses. A fixed sequence of typed, role-specialized actions formalizes the public task, analyzes structure and classical bottlenecks, matches a source-linked registry of quantum primitives and barriers, and constructs a scoped candidate scheme. A deterministic ten-check validator assigns the authoritative verdict; completed states are compiled into a Quantum Acceleration Evidence Graph and passed through a downward-only research screen that cannot strengthen the decision. We evaluate QuantumMind against seven task-adapted prompting and agentic controls on 582 identical open-discovery tasks. Under the frozen Open-Discovery Score (ODS), QuantumMind obtains 53.1 mean ODS, exceeding the strongest baseline by 17.3 points (48.2% relative), and wins 355 of 582 paired tasks against that baseline. It passes the graph audit on 99.8% of tasks, compared with 43.6% for the strongest baseline, and ranks first in all seven task families. The results indicate that typed state transitions and deterministic evidence control contribute beyond fluent generation alone.

Memory systems have shown promise for improving agent performance, but their potential remains largely unexplored for small language models, which struggle to generate sufficient successful trajectories on their own. We propose Agent Memory Distillation (AMD), a training-free framework that transfers structured knowledge from a large teacher agent to a small student agent through hierarchical memory. AMD constructs three complementary memory types from successful teacher trajectories: Workflow memory encodes task-level strategies, Subtask memory provides concrete behavioral examples at an intermediate granularity, and Function memory captures per-function calling conventions and common pitfalls. Workflow and Subtask memories are injected proactively at the start of each task, while Function memory is retrieved reactively upon tool-calling errors. We evaluate AMD on three tool-use benchmarks using four student models (4B-8B parameters) with GPT-5-mini as the teacher, achieving average accuracy gains of 27.2%p, 11.2%p, and 3.4%p on AppWorld, BFCL V3, and ToolSandbox, while consistently outperforming existing memory-based baselines. Further analysis shows that Subtask memory contributes the largest gains, teacher effectiveness depends on both teacher capability and student compatibility, and 4B-sized students benefit most from AMD.

Early-stage molecular design is an iterative process, not just a task of generating molecules. Researchers turn broad goals into design strategies, refine candidates, assess many properties, and gather evidence before synthesis and tests. AI methods can generate molecules, optimize several goals, predict properties, dock compounds, and account for synthesis. Yet these functions are spread across specialized tools. Experts must still coordinate each step, judge interim results, and integrate evidence. The central challenge is thus to turn research intent into adaptive, traceable runs grounded in scientific tools. We cast this challenge as intent-to-evidence molecular design workflow execution and present CAi Copilot, an expert-oriented agent with three linked layers. The Research Interface Layer turns intent into an executable plan. The Agent Reasoning Layer uses interim results to guide each run. The Execution Substrate supplies molecular tools, metrics, reusable utilities, and backend services. Across 45 tasks, CAi achieves the strongest overall performance, with an outcome score of 84.59, exceeding the next-best result by 18.07 points. Additional benchmarks test how CAi coordinates generation, screening, and multi-criteria evaluation, while exposing limits in long-horizon execution. These results show that CAi turns broad molecular-design intent into transparent, traceable workflows that connect interim decisions to candidate-level evidence.

Most agent benchmarks evaluate tasks independently and cannot measure whether experience from one task helps with later tasks. Existing self-evolution benchmarks do not jointly cover professional workflows, open-ended deliverables, and multi-aspect evaluation. We introduce FinEvo-Bench, a longitudinal benchmark with 120 real-case-grounded tasks, 20 business scenes across six financial domains. Institution-provided professional procedures define the required operations and constraints. Eligible institution-provided and publicly documented cases supply the task facts. Each scene contains six related but substantively distinct cases that share a professional procedure and a manually reviewed rubric for task quality and financial compliance. We compare four self-evolving agent scaffolds using the same Qwen3.7-Max backbone and three independently shuffled, globally interleaved task streams. Paired non-evolving controls estimate each scaffold's self-evolution gain from retained experience, while an independent Claude Code scoring agent backed by Claude Opus 4.6 evaluates all outputs. Letta achieves the highest evolved score (91.65) and fewest compliance issues (0.09 per task); Codex achieves the largest self-evolution gain (+19.37). Across scaffolds, the evolving condition raises scores by 9.33-19.37 points and reduces compliance issues by 0.12-0.44 per task. Paired score gains at within-scene ranks 4-6 exceed those at ranks 1-3 by 6.10-8.70 points. In Claude Code, skill-only evolution produces higher task quality and fewer compliance issues than memory-only and combined memory-skill evolution. Across all four scaffolds, rubric feedback also yields higher scores and fewer compliance issues than reference-answer feedback. FinEvo-Bench measures both professional performance and self-evolution ability: how effectively an agent turns prior experience into later improvement.

AI agents performing cryptographic operations (signing Git commits, authenticating API calls, issuing certificates) currently store private keys in software-accessible locations: plaintext files, environment variables, or container memory. Any process with sufficient read privileges can extract the raw key material. A recent production incident demonstrated the practical severity: private keys were exfiltrated from a widely deployed framework via email injection in under five minutes. We aim to enforce both key confidentiality and content-aware authorisation for key use. To that end, we replace software-resident keys with hardware-confined keys accessible through a vendor-neutral PKCS#11 interface. A hardware keystore (HSM, TPM, smart card) executes cryptographic operations on-device; the host receives only the result via opaque handles. Hardware confinement is the primary contribution; it is enabled by a surrounding five-layer Zero-Trust enforcement stack comprising session identity (SAGA), scope bounds (Smax), semantic validation (RAV), taint tracking, and the hardware execution boundary. We evaluate against 12 injection scenarios derived from AgentDojo's ImportantInstructionsAttack template (Debenedetti et al., arXiv:2406.13352). We run four LLM models; three follow injections in baseline mode (gpt-oss-120b, Qwen2.5-72B, DeepSeek-V4-Flash, n=192 combined). Baseline Attack Success Rate (ASR): 19.3% [14.3%, 25.4%]; protected ASR: 0% (Wilson 95% CI upper bound 2.0%). Zero false positives across four benign task scenarios.

AI-agent workflows often involve remote calls to models, memory stores, and tools distributed across a network. As execution progresses, these dependency calls collectively form an agentic service graph (ASG). Unlike traditional service requests, many dependency calls are revealed only at runtime. Consequently, allocating resources to a currently visible call may consume capacity later needed by a call from a higher-value workflow. We formulate this challenge as Agentic Service Graph Embedding (ASGE), an online network-control problem that maps runtime-revealed workflow calls to service replicas and network paths under capacity, cost and deadline constraints. We present ASGE-RR, an online ASGE controller with revisable reservations. ASGE-RR protects capacity for likely future calls while enforcing the constraints. ASGE-RR evaluates candidate replica-and-path mappings against predicted workflow continuations and updates reservations as new execution information becomes available. We evaluate ASGE-RR using OpenHands and GPT Researcher workflows executed with gpt-5.6-luna and replayed over in two complementary experimental environments, a controlled Docker testbed and a WAN testbed. The investigation shows that all the evaluated AI-agent tasks expose at least one runtime-revealed dependency call that can be steered before connection establishment. Exploiting this control point, even though the experimental environments are small-scale, ASGE-RR already demonstrates noticeable potential: It completes (up to) 10% more workflow value than a same-information rolling-horizon controller and a current-call steering controller on the WAN testbed. The results suggest that runtime-revealed workflow structure creates a new network control opportunity: protecting resources for likely future calls allows more AI-agent workflows to finish in time.

Generative AI systems are increasingly deployed in high-stakes professional contexts, where their outputs shape what users believe, how they reason, and what they treat as settled. This raises a central question for responsible AI: under what conditions is reliance on generative AI outputs epistemically warranted rather than behaviourally induced? Existing frameworks largely ask whether AI outputs are accurate, fair, explainable, safe, or trusted by users. These questions remain necessary, and each can contribute to warranted reliance. However, they do not directly specify warranted reliance as a distinct evaluative target: the conditions under which users are justified in treating AI outputs as inputs into their own reasoning. We argue that this requires an account of epistemic trustworthiness: what makes a system epistemically worthy of reliance. Drawing on philosophical accounts of trustworthiness as competence and audience-orientation, we develop a constitutive normative framework comprising three jointly necessary and non-fungible conditions. First, epistemic humility requires systems to represent and communicate the limits of their competence. Second, epistemic access requires systems to enable users to inspect, question, and contest outputs in context. Third, resistance to epistemic injustice requires systems to recognise users as legitimate epistemic agents and avoid marginalising their knowledge and experience. Through real-world case analyses in legal reasoning, medical reasoning, and hiring, we show how failures of epistemic humility, epistemic access, and resistance to epistemic injustice can produce consequential harms that standard measures of accuracy, fairness, and usability do not address on their own. We conclude by outlining design and evaluation implications for GenAI systems organised around epistemically warranted reliance rather than output correctness alone.

CheMLFlow is an open-source platform for building and executing end-to-end, high-throughput, and agentic workflows for scientific and technological applications. CheMLFlow targets a common bottleneck in scientific machine learning development, where researchers often need to assemble data acquisition, curation, representation, model training, validation, screening, interpretation, and reporting into a reproducible pipeline, even when their primary research contribution concerns only one stage. CheMLFlow provides modular workflow components, ready-to-run reference pipelines, standardized artifacts, and evaluation outputs that reduce orchestration overhead and support benchmarking across methods and datasets. The platform is designed to be extensible, reproducible, and automation friendly, with pluggable representations and models, deterministic splits, explicit run artifacts, batch execution, and report generation. As scientific software increasingly moves toward agent assisted experimentation, CheMLFlow's configuration driven workflows and structured outputs also provide a practical interface for coding agents to help users construct experiments, inspect results, and summarize findings under human supervision. This article describes the system architecture, core workflows, and benchmarks that reach literature performance for quantum mechanical, physicochemical and bioactivity property prediction, and use cases involving time series datasets demonstrating applications beyond molecular chemistry datasets.

Memory is essential as language agents move from isolated tasks to long-horizon, stateful workflows, yet existing evaluations often reduce it to retrieval or question answering. We introduce ContextWeave, a longitudinal benchmark that evaluates whether recalled experience improves downstream agent performance in realistic office-work streams. ContextWeave reconstructs privacy-preserved, multi-month workflows of 14 participants into 1,005 executable tasks, including 568 core evaluation tasks, with instructions, containerized environments, trajectories, and task-specific rubrics. It measures workspace quality and alignment with participant-specific preferences, complemented by diagnostics of relevance, continuity, solvability, and robustness to misleading recall. Across six memory components under a fixed model, the strongest configuration raises Workspace Score from 68.08 to 78.20 and Preference Score from 41.50 to 70.60. With a fixed memory component, recall improves both outcomes for all five tested base models, although gains vary substantially. Our analysis shows that actionable, experience-rich memory supports workflow continuation and reduces redundant exploration more effectively than compact summaries, while it can also be more susceptible to misleading recall. These findings motivate memory systems that optimize not only retrieval relevance but also reliable use during execution.

Agentic AI is emerging in datacenters, but its architectural implications remain unexplored. We organize agentic workflows in a taxonomy and present its first architectural characterization with a production study at Microsoft Azure and a controlled study of open-source frameworks. We show that agentic execution is fragmented and heterogeneous. Requests expand into a workflow of LLM inferences, tool invocations, and orchestration decisions that repeatedly cross the CPU-GPU boundary. Our taxonomy explains how this fragmentation turns into resource demand. As orchestration and tools run on the host, the CPU sits on the critical path. Execution structure sets the load over time, which stays low with sudden spikes. Model composition sets how evenly the workflow uses the GPUs. Diversity in tasks and tools widens this range even further. These characteristics expose architectural mismatches of conventional uniform servers. Fragmented execution strands CPU and GPU capacity despite bursty demand. Different software roles make homogeneous CPU provisioning inefficient. Finally, multiplexing many agents onto shared cores degrades microarchitectural locality. Guided by our findings, we derive implications for agentic servers and examine them through Agora, our prototype for commodity servers. Agora dynamically harvests idle CPU cores for co-located throughput work, while protecting agentic tail latency against tool spikes. It oversubscribes GPU memory by placing more agents on each GPU, prefetching the next agent's state to hide swap latency. To match the machine to the heterogeneous roles, Agora pools cores by role and applies affinity-aware scheduling to restore locality. It automatically tunes mechanisms to the workload. Agora improves utilization and server throughput while preserving agent tail latency. Our insights also identify key directions for future server architectures for agentic AI.

Agentic code generation has shown promise in automating and accelerating software development by utilizing Large Language Models (LLMs) to generate, test, and deploy code. For engineers and scientists, such systems have the potential to accelerate the development of applied and scientific workflows while reducing barriers to entry in domains that have yet to fully realize their benefits. However, a key gap remains: existing coding agents primarily focus on code generation and do not address the entire workflow lifecycle, including deployment and sharing. As a result, users develop and stitch modules independently while managing deployment on their own. To address this gap, we propose CURATE - Composition, User-in-the-loop, Reuse, and Automated Task Execution - a novel human-in-the-loop multi-agent system that uses LLM agents to manage and develop composable workflows across their entire lifecycle. A key feature of the system is a catalog that allows for the storage and reuse of modules across workflows. Module catalogs provide a foundation that can be expanded to support FAIR principles by facilitating the sharing and reuse of curated modules and subgraphs. We demonstrate the feasibility of our system with an initial prototype using Claude Opus 4.8, comprising 6 experiments: reproducing and adapting 4 workflows derived from the SeBS-Flow benchmark suite, and automating the development and scaling of a workflow that leverages a complex mechanistic model in environmental engineering used to simulate anaerobic digestion.

A framework that persists execution state so a run can be interrupted, survive a crash, and continue must decide what a resume means for effects that already happened. Five widely deployed agent workflow frameworks answer differently, none exposes a machine-checkable contract, and measured behavior violates even the fragments they state. The RESUME CONTRACT states six properties over the persistence API (prefix continuation, effect exactly-once, fork determinism, checkpoint validity, consume-once, recovery determinism), plus fork-intent and liveness obligations. A TLA+ model checks a reference semantics exhaustively, unchanged at scaled bounds (7.4 million states), and the reference conjunction is additionally TLAPS-proved unbounded (196 obligations); a 39-cell fault matrix and two companion modules yield the separating models independence requires. A deterministic, LLM-free harness measures them at pinned releases. LangGraph 1.2.9 durably records a second resume value and never consults it, persists schema-invalid state silently, and re-executes durably recorded work after a real SIGKILL: exactly-once across interrupts, at-least-once across crashes, on one API. CrewAI 1.15.2 re-executes completed effect-bearing methods against its written claim; pydantic-graph 1.x cannot resume after a mid-node crash; no two probed frameworks share a conformance profile. Consume-once holds sequentially and fails under concurrent delivery: k processes resuming one parked interrupt fire the gated effect k times, saturation 1.0 in 36 of 40 cells, and the failure crosses hosts. REMIT, a reference sequencer whose Verus-verified recovery core is line-identical to the shipped executable, repairs the fork and validity cells. The cross-process cell is repaired at the read path: an opt-in gate claims consumption in the shared store, serving one racer and refusing the rest before any node executes.

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.

As Moore's law slows, the industry is turning to three-dimensional integration; yet in merged 3D-IC flows, routed designs expose bond-level defects with no 2D analogue, and post-route engineering change orders (ECO) remain manual, expertise-bound work. Worse, the standard edit-then-fully-reroute practice entangles a repair with router churn, so a signoff number cannot be attributed to the edit that motivated it. We present AgenticECO, an evidence-gated tool-using agent workflow for 3D-IC ECO on the open-source TaiWei flow, paired with EcoRoute, a minimal-disturbance ECO-routing layer that drives the unmodified pinned router so a repair is attributable to its edit. Across nine matched natural defect cases under identical budgets, AgenticECO clears seven versus two for both full reroute and stock repair, at 0.66% mean disturbance over cleared cases and zero clock nets touched, and a cross-backbone rerun under the same sealed contract clears all nine. Controlled studies show that the repair moves are necessary under preservation, that occupancy-aware choice buys legal landings rather than repair success, and that under tightened clocks minimal disturbance flips accept versus reject. Three preregistered visual studies localize the pixel instrument's edge to contested landing sites, and a preregistered blind diagnostic exactly restores every held-out injected defect, the only arm with zero wrong edits. Every accepted result passes routing, fresh extraction, max/min timing, DRC, and structural-equivalence gates. Code, environment, and per-episode audit artifacts are released as supplementary material.

Agentic systems driven by large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in real-world workflows where they act on persistent operational data. Before deployment, these systems need to be verified against business requirements that govern workflow execution and data evolution. However, existing approaches do not provide such system-level guarantees, as they mainly constrain or analyse behaviour at the agent's interface level. We study here the verification of agentic systems comprising a single LLM and a tool orchestration harness over relational operational data. We formalise them as Stateful Tool-Enabled Agentic Deployments (STEADs), give their semantics, define the problem of verifying them against First-Order Computation Tree Logic (FO-CTL) specifications, and show that it is undecidable. We identify sufficient conditions for exact preservation of FO-CTL specifications under a finite-domain restriction, over which verification is PSPACE-complete. The key requirement is that renaming opaque identifiers in the data must correspondingly rename the selected tool calls. We show that LLM-driven agents can violate this condition and introduce a canonical deployment wrapper that guarantees it for arbitrary base agents while preserving already-equivariant behaviour. We prove that computing canonical representations required by this construction is graph-isomorphism-hard. Finally, we illustrate our framework on an LLM agent orchestrating a case-management workflow.

Partial differential equations (PDEs) become actionable in science and engineering not as isolated formulae, but as executable workflows that connect modelling assumptions, governing equations, numerical solvers, diagnostics, and decisions. Large language models (LLMs) are beginning to support such workflows by linking natural language, symbolic mathematics, code, solver outputs, and feedback. Here we examine recent advances in LLM-assisted PDE research across three stages: the discovery and formulation of governing models, the generation and revision of executable numerical solvers, and the use of simulation feedback to support control, design, and optimization. Across these stages, current systems act primarily as workflow-level interfaces. Despite this progress, the field remains limited by the scarcity of high-quality datasets and benchmarks, especially for knowledge discovery and real-world applications, where expert annotation, executable problem construction, and task-level feedback require substantial domain effort. A further challenge is the persistent gap between simulation-based results and real-world scientific and engineering systems, which limits the direct transfer of numerical simulations, control policies, and optimized designs to practical settings. These challenges make LLM-assisted PDE workflows a critical testbed for developing scientific AI systems that can connect language, computation, physical constraints, and real-world decision-making.

AI coding agents are stochastic workflows: prompts are interpreted, artifacts are sampled, validators produce observations, and orchestrators commit or repair. Small prompt or specification changes can therefore alter program-behavior distributions even when the texts appear synonymous. Existing systems evaluate correctness, but lack a compositional criterion for safely replacing a prompt, contract, generator, or program inside a complete agentic workflow. We introduce GenOS, a probabilistic operational semantics for this replacement problem. Each layer is modeled as a Markov kernel, and each interface carries an observer-relative equivalence. We prove that equivalence-compatible kernels descend to quotient classes and that quotienting commutes with distributional extension and sequential composition. Hence, equivalent prompts induce equal probabilities for all downstream equivalence-closed events, including verified commit. We also establish workflow bisimulation, guarded-commit safety under sound validation, total-variation non-expansiveness, and an additive robustness bound that attributes approximation error to individual pipeline layers. An executable insertion-sort audit instantiates the theory with natural-language paraphrases, a formal contract, six programs, two observers, and exhaustive execution on 121 inputs. Equivalent prompts yield identical code-class and commit distributions; a prompt assigning 5% probability to an in-place contract is distinguished by a mutation observer, while downstream distances remain within the predicted bound. Across 20,000 randomized finite-kernel trials, no exact or approximate law is violated. GenOS is model-parametric: compatibility is a measurable property to test, not an assumption about language-model behavior.

Enterprise compliance management requires rapid adaptation to evolving regulatory frameworks (e.g., DORA, AI RMF, FedRAMP) and tight remediation SLAs. Traditional static orchestrators often fail in hybrid cloud environments where event-driven assessments demand that automation code adapt to runtime context in seconds. This paper presents lessons learned from evaluating six large language models for AI-driven workflow generation in a production enterprise platform, benchmarked across 29 real-world IT automation scenarios, two generation pipeline architectures, and eight independent runs per prompt-model-pipeline configuration (2,784 runs total). Our initial pipeline used monolithic workflow generation, achieving 31.5-82.8% structural success rates (JSON schema validity and correct UI rendering), with most models struggling on complex JSON generation. We developed a redesigned piecewise pipeline that decomposes workflow construction into variable scaffolding, base block assembly, and nested block generation, raising structural success to 74.1-97.8% across all models. We analyze production tradeoffs including cost (USD 0.008-0.20 per workflow), latency (under 50s for interactive use), and model selection. Piecewise decomposition enables smaller models (e.g., mistral-small at 95.7% structural success and USD 0.01 per workflow) to reach production viability, removing dependency on expensive frontier models. While mistral-medium-2505 and gpt-oss-120b achieved the highest structural success (96.1% and 97.8%), mistral-medium-2505 carries a 19x cost premium versus mistral-small. Our deployment lessons highlight the need to separate structural validity from semantic correctness (logical fulfillment of user intent) and provide a solution for model-agnostic, scalable automation in cloud engineering.