arXiv:2607. 17641v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Verify-repair loops are a standard means for large language model (LLM) agents to correct faulty plans in code generation, mathematical reasoning, and tool use.
By Yitao Wu, Si Shen, Rui Yang, Hong Peng, Bin Hu
Verify-repair loops are a standard means for large language model (LLM) agents to correct faulty plans in code generation, mathematical reasoning, and tool use. When both the verifier and the repairer are noisy, repair can damage already-correct plans, and reported acceptance keeps rising while true validity falls, so existing methods lack a principled basis for deciding when repair should stop.
The Agent Error Dataset (AED) presents 50,228 error–diagnosis pairs collected from 9,961 source tasks across 33 environments, 19 harness families, and 23 policy models in text‑based agent systems. A five‑stage Agentic Error‑to‑Training (AET) pipeline generates diagnoses and proposed corrections, verifies them against recorded evidence, and creates separate training views for diagnosis and actor recovery. Experiments show that first‑proposal corrections improve verifier pass rates from 18.4% to 51.1%, and fine‑tuning with full‑diagnosis data raises Qwen3‑8B’s exact‑step agreement from 47.2% to 63.6% on a holdout set.
By Kunlun Zhu, Xuyan Ye, Yibo Li, Cheng Qian, Beibin Li, Heng Ji
arXiv:2609.15684v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Language agents increasingly rely on reusable skills, but post-failure repair is often handled by opaque one-shot reflection: a model generates a skill...
By Mengyi Deng, Xin Li, Duyi Pan, Zilin Wang, Zhiwei Li, Zhijiang Guo, Wei Wang
The paper introduces a fixed‑budget revision protocol that uses deterministic verifiers to expose all remaining violations across exact‑length, lexical, and compositional constraints, thereby isolating model‑side revision behavior. Experiments on 19 open‑ and closed‑source LLMs show wide variability in controller‑level success, with some models achieving up to 99.8% success while others remain below 20%. Controlled studies reveal that post‑training and scale affect model responses to exact feedback, but do not consistently improve exact correction, and that recurrence of earlier outputs is linked to lower recoverability.
By Haitong Jiang, Chunlin Liu, Yile Wang, Yuhong Feng
arXiv:2607. 28871v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: When a repair agent runs a test and sees it pass, the result is treated as evidence about the reported defect.
By Xiaonan Xu, Wenjing Wu
The paper presents a post‑training recipe for small dialogue‑game agents that involves three steps: acquiring broad game participation via supervised fine‑tuning, repairing specific local failures with turn‑local preference pairs, and preserving general capabilities. Applied to the LM Playschool Challenge, the method raises the public clemscore from 10.67 to 38.92 and the closed in‑domain score from 13.41 to 41.17 while keeping overall static performance nearly unchanged. The gains are mainly within the targeted game family, with limited improvement on out‑of‑domain clemscore.
By Nan Li
arXiv:2608.25920v2 Announce Type: replace
Abstract: As large language model (LLM)-based multi-agent systems (MASs) are increasingly applied to long-horizon complex tasks, their reliability has emerge...
By Zhongwen Luan, Xiaoyu Zhang, Ming Hu, Yue Yang, Jiongchi Yu, Xiaohong Chen
arXiv:2607. 18245v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Exact-match evaluation of agent-calling obscures qualitatively different failure modes: a model may select the right function yet hallucinate argument values, or satisfy a schema while choosing a agent for the wrong reason.
By Ritvik Garimella, Vedant Khandelwal, Anvi Kohli, Amit Sheth
arXiv:2609.36138v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Before invoking external tools, an agentic LLM must select among a K-way action space: executing a call, seeking clarification, answering directly, or...
By Jiayi Li, Ruizhe Li
arXiv:2606. 09863v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: LLM agents can fail silently by asserting task completion when the environment state shows otherwise.
By Laksh Advani
Self-correction is particularly useful when a failure constrains the next repair. Coding agents benefit from this property because compilers, tests, and execution traces turn many failures into typed recovery signals, but broad language-agent tasks often expose only a coarse task failure.