The paper argues that evaluating agents as fixed models is insufficient, proposing instead to treat them as configurable systems. Using a new benchmark of four scientific tasks, the authors analyze how five configuration aspects—task information, reasoning, self‑verification, time budget, and backbone model—affect performance, noting that about 54% of outcome variance arises from run‑to‑run differences even with the same settings. The study finds that providing more task information has the strongest impact, while interactions among settings (e.g., extra time only helps with adequate information or model capability) and the choice of verification tools significantly shape agent behavior.
arXiv:2607. 22682v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: We introduce a vocabulary for automated research systems built from one or more agents to make their design choices easier to describe and compare.
arXiv:2607. 06624v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: We present AgentLens, a production-assessed benchmark for interactive code agents.
arXiv:2608. 05519v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Agent benchmarks usually measure task completion and treat resource use as an auxiliary statistic.
arXiv:2607. 25398v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Language-model agents are increasingly deployed under standing instructions: a system prompt, a policy file, or a skills document is placed in context, and the agent is trusted to let it govern every action that follows.
arXiv:2606. 13608v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Agent systems are advancing quickly across domains, but their evaluation remains fragmented.
The paper introduces AgentX-Model, a dual‑agent framework that links proposal development with model experimentation in industrial recommender systems. The Research Agent drafts proposals from literature and prior findings, while the Model Agent runs multi‑round experiments, returning code, metrics, and open questions. The framework iteratively selects starting implementations and formulates new research questions, organizing work into Reproduce, Follow‑up, Composition, and Diagnose actions. Across production evaluations, most experiments exceeded business baselines, with recent A/B tests showing significant gains in acquisition efficiency, advertising spend, and watch time while reducing computational cost.
Two prompts can request the same code change and produce the same correct patch, yet cause a coding agent to perform radically different kinds and amounts of work. We study this effect in a preregistered benchmark spanning 4,644 valid runs, 24 deterministic coding tasks, seven reasoning models, and two real agent harnesses.
arXiv:2604. 12147v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Agents are commonly instructed to follow a task-specific plan for guidance.
arXiv:2609.01271v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Agentic software engineering benchmarks are typically summarized by nominal category labels such as "bug fix" or "feature implementation," yet benchm...
arXiv:2605. 27898v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: As LLMs are increasingly deployed as agents, reliable assessment of their agentic capabilities has become essential.
arXiv:2606. 19787v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models are increasingly deployed as autonomous agents for multi-step tasks in executable environments, yet their ability to perform realistic operations research (OR) work remains unclear.
arXiv:2607. 13034v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language model (LLM) agents increasingly automate multi-step engineering and informatics workflows, yet they rarely ask how much effort a task actually requires.