arXiv:2605.18859v3 Announce Type: replace-cross
Abstract: LLM routing matters most in long-horizon applications such as coding agents, deep research systems, and computer-use agents, where a single u...
By Pei Yang, Wanyi Chen, Tongyun Yang, Pengbin Feng, Jiarong Xing, Wentao Guo, Yuhang Yao, Yuhang Han, Hanchen Li, Xu Wang, Zeyu Wang, Jie Xiao, Anjie Yang, Liang Tian, Lynn Ai, Eric Yang, Tianyu Shi
arXiv:2608. 14927v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Multi-agent large language model (LLM) systems can improve reasoning by spending more computation, but deployment requires deciding when extra collaboration is worth its cost.
By Chih-Hsuan Yang, Jingyan Jiang, Cheng-Hau Yang, Vikram Vasudevan, Huihuo Zheng, Venkatram Vishwanath, Rajeev Thakur
arXiv:2607. 20531v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language model (LLM) agents are increasingly deployed over Model Context Protocol (MCP) servers, yet the benchmarks used to evaluate them score the final answer or a fixed "ground-truth" list of tools, both of which are fragile once the underlying data is live and stateful.
By Jerzy Kami\'nski, Ilya Galyukshev, Artem Kuznetsov, Sergey Chuprin, Kirill Redko, Aidar Shumbalov, Anna Kalyuzhnaya
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
UniACE is a unified framework that standardizes the evaluation of large language model (LLM) agents by representing each benchmark as an instruction–tool–environment triplet and running models through a shared, task‑agnostic harness in isolated runtimes. It preserves native success criteria, offers an offline mode for dynamic‑resource tasks, and standardizes efficiency metrics, execution records, and failure attribution. Applying UniACE to 7 benchmarks across 24 domains and 15 models revealed significant score shifts, ranking reversals, and sensitivity to evidence representation, highlighting the impact of evaluation configuration on reported agent performance.
By Pengyu Zhu, Lijun Li, Yaxing Lyu, Qianxin Luo, Jingyi Yang, Yi Liu, Tingfeng Hui, Xinyu Yuan, Li Sun, Sen Su, Jing Shao
arXiv:2609.21423v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Online agent deployments produce abundant execution traces, while task-specific verification and expert annotation are costly to scale. We study how to...
By Siyuan Liu (Fudan University, Meituan Longcat Team), Fan Yu (Fudan University, Meituan Longcat Team), Dongyu Ru (Meituan Longcat Team), Yizhu Liu (Meituan Longcat Team), Yifan Yang (Meituan Longcat Team), Xuezhi Cao (Meituan Longcat Team), Xunliang Cai (Meituan Longcat Team), Yixin Cao (Fudan University)
arXiv:2607. 15388v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Many math- and science-oriented agent systems use hierarchical designs with specialized reviewer roles, assuming that a dedicated review stage should help turn wrong candidates into correct ones.
By Chih-Hsuan Yang, Jingyan Jiang, Vikram Vasudevan, Cheng-Hau Yang, Huihuo Zheng, Le Chen, Eliu A. Huerta, Venkatram Vishwanath, Ian T. Foster, Rajeev Thakur
FaulT-Bench is a new benchmark comprising 200 network troubleshooting scenarios across eight topologies, designed to test large‑language‑model agents on realistic, noisy tickets that may contain false premises or incorrect fault claims. The benchmark includes 72 rewritten tickets that vary reporter confidence and detail, and evaluates agents via an automated harness that scores diagnoses on outcome, fix, and reasoning quality. Results show that while agents perform well on accurate tickets, they degrade sharply on healthy networks with misleading reports, highlighting the importance of ticket wording over content.
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
arXiv:2607. 22465v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Routing to select large language models (LLMs) with different cost-quality trade-offs has become a fundamental deployment feature of enterprise AI.
By Ritik Raj, Souvik Kundu, Sarbartha Banerjee, Dheemanth Joshi, Ishita Vohra, Tushar Krishna
arXiv:2607. 16215v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Existing guardrail systems for large language model agents operate as binary classifiers that block unsafe content, leaving organizations to discard failing outputs and retry from scratch.
By Sumit Verma, Pritam Prasun, Pritish Kumar
arXiv:2608. 00107v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Agentic systems must repeatedly decide whether to answer directly, decompose a task, invoke a tool, execute code, delegate to a specialist, verify an intermediate result, or recover from failure.
By Natan Vidra, Alina Kapanova, Arun Kanhai, Spurthi Setty