The paper introduces Continual Search, an iterative framework that guides large language models to persistently search for diagnostic evidence in long AI agent execution logs, addressing the limitations of one-shot judgments. Evaluated on four existing RCA benchmarks and a new large-scale dataset called MegaRCA-Mix, Continual Search consistently boosts attribution performance, achieving a 40% F1 improvement for GPT‑5.5 on MegaRCA‑Mix. The results show that effective search can outweigh raw model scale, enabling lower-tier models to outperform higher-tier ones in root‑cause attribution tasks.
By Harsh Raj, David Lee, Anas Mahmoud, Renxiong Wang, Razvan-Gabriel Dumitru, Chenguang Wang, Tong Zhao, Yunzhong He, Darvin Yi, Vipul Gupta
arXiv:2606. 02060v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Deep-research agents solve tasks through long trajectories of search, tool use, evidence inspection, and answer synthesis.
By Jiaming Wang, Ziteng Feng, Jiangtao Wu, Ruihao Li, Qianqian Xie, Yuxiang Ren, He Zhu, Xueming Han, Fanyu Meng, Junlan Feng, Jiaheng Liu
The paper introduces Traverse, a benchmark of 2,518 agent trajectories and 6,967 annotated mistakes across software engineering, computer use, and science tasks, revealing that failures often go unrecovered and can cause irreversible harm before a run is deemed successful. It shows that human judges struggle to detect the first mistake in most runs, while a 4‑billion‑parameter verifier called Scout can locate failures more effectively and improve task success when used to select among candidate runs. The study demonstrates that making failure detection inexpensive and reliable can enable long‑horizon agents to learn from their own mistakes and increase trustworthiness in autonomous AI.
By Salman Rahman, Yubin Kim, Mihir Parmar, A. Ali Heydari, Genglin Liu, Simon A. Lee, Weizhi Zhang, Arian Hosseini, Ahmed A. Metwally, Yuzhe Yang, Baharan Mirzasoleiman, Xin Liu, Pavel Izmailov, Saadia Gabriel, Mark Malhotra, Shwetak Patel, Daniel McDuff, Hamid Palangi
The paper introduces decision checkpoints that log observations and tool actions during inference, enabling the assignment of outcome categories to scientific-search agent responses. Using these checkpoints on 540 AutoResearchBench questions, the authors compare keyword search and read-first strategies, finding that keyword search yields 24.6% accuracy while raw search achieves 17.8%. The checkpoint protocol reveals detailed differences in target exposure, inspection attempts, and evidence-search calls that aggregate accuracy alone obscures.
By Hongmin Li, Wanli Zhao
arXiv:2604. 16706v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Automated evaluation of tool-using large language model (LLM) agents is widely assumed to be reliable, yet this assumption is rarely validated against human annotation.
By Bhaskar Gurram
arXiv:2609.33676v2 Announce Type: replace
Abstract: LLM agents increasingly take consequential actions through interactions with users, policies, and external tools. Auditing these agents requires au...
By Yifan Liu, Praveen Venkateswaran, Abdulhamid Adebayo, Dong Wang
arXiv:2606. 09046v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Useful audits reveal not only how often a model fails, but also where its failures concentrate.
By Vyzantinos Repantis, Ameya Gawde, Harshvardhan Singh
arXiv:2606. 09071v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language model (LLM) agents now solve complex tasks through long plan-and-execution traces, yet the ability to locate errors in a completed traces still lags far behind, especially in the \emph{silent failure} regime.
By Xiaofeng Lin, Yingxu Wang, Tung Sum Thomas Kwok, Daniel Guo, Sahil Arun Nale, Charles Fleming, Guang Cheng
arXiv:2607. 18754v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: LLM agent failures are difficult to debug because the step where an error surfaces is often not the one that caused it.
By Kunlun Zhu, Xuyan Ye, Zhiguang Han, Yuchen Zhao, Bingxuan Li, Weijia Zhang, Muxin Tian, Xiangru Tang, Pan Lu, James Zou, Jiaxuan You, Heng Ji
arXiv:2606. 01365v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Tool-using multi-agent large language model (LLM) systems spend computation through model tokens, tool calls, retries, and code execution before producing an answer.
By Xianyou Li, Weiran Yan, Yichao Wu, Penghao Liang, Mengwei Yuan, Jianan Liu, Jing Yang
arXiv:2608.22510v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Agent benchmarks often evaluate only final answers even when agents run on stateful runtimes. We argue this under-specifies what is being evaluated: th...
By YuanHang Xiao
arXiv:2606. 10241v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Autonomous improvement loops are hard to trust because the improvement process is usually external scaffolding bolted onto the agent: failures go unlogged, diagnoses cannot be replayed, and promote-or-discard decisions land in a side database rather than the agent's own history.
By Yohei Nakajima