arXiv:2607. 05775v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language model (LLM) agents are increasingly evaluated on their ability to use tools, plan multi-step tasks, coordinate with other agents, and operate over extended horizons.
By Wael Albayaydh, Rui Zhao, Ivan Flechais
Large language model (LLM) agents are increasingly evaluated on their ability to use tools, plan multi-step tasks, coordinate with other agents, and operate over extended horizons. Reported benchmark gains often obscure recurring failure modes documented across otherwise unrelated evaluation efforts.
arXiv:2601. 03555v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Training reliable tool-augmented agents remains a significant challenge, largely due to the difficulty of credit assignment in multi-step reasoning.
By Yuxuan Jiang, Francis Ferraro
DynSTEER is a dynamic stage‑wise trajectory evaluation framework designed for large language model agents performing long‑horizon tasks. It segments rollouts into stages anchored by key actions, uses a path‑tolerant milestone graph to accommodate diverse valid strategies, and adaptively routes queries to multi‑tier judges while halting unrecoverable executions early. Experiments show it improves evaluation discriminability by 85.2% over native methods, separates all model pairs with statistical significance, and saves 34.51% of execution steps on failed rollouts.
By Zhichao Shi, Wenjie Zhang, Xuhui Jiang, Xiaojun Wu, Cehao Yang, Chengjin Xu, Jian Guo, Yuanzhuo Wang
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.
By Jiajun Li, Mingshu Cai, Yixuan Li, Yu Ding, Ran Hou, Guanyu Nie, Xiongwei Han, Wanyuan Wang
arXiv:2607. 10059v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Agent systems based on large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed for autonomous tasks, yet existing evaluations mostly focus on task success rather than whether agents know when to abstain.
By Xun Liu, Yi Evie Zhang, Vira Kasprova, Parisa Rabbani, Pardis Sadat Zahraei, Tianyu Zhang, Ali Ebrahimpour-Boroojeny, Varun Chandrasekaran
CAST is a critique‑aware training framework that transforms sparse task outcomes into action‑level supervision for both critique learning and policy optimization. By analyzing agent trajectories, CAST synthesizes structured rationales that explain action validity under partial observability, enabling the creation of richer training data. Fine‑tuned Qwen3‑family models trained with CAST show significant reliability gains, outperforming GPT‑OSS‑120B by over 10% on Retail tasks and improving Telehealth performance by 9% in an out‑of‑domain setting.
By Amir Saeidi, Zehua Zhang, Rishitosh Singh, Naman Ahuja, Vivek Gupta, Ali Payani, Gaowen Liu, Jayanth Srinivasa, Chitta Baral
IDRBench is a benchmark designed to evaluate the interactive capabilities of deep research agents that use large language models. It introduces controlled opportunities for clarification within a common workflow, comparing autonomous and interactive trajectories by measuring task‑specific report alignment and interaction cost. Experiments on 100 tasks with seven LLMs show that interaction consistently improves alignment, though its effectiveness varies depending on the agents’ questions and feedback integration.
By Yingchaojie Feng, Qiang Huang, Xiaoya Xie, Zhaorui Yang, Jun Yu, Wei Chen, Anthony K. H. Tung
arXiv:2510. 19771v4 Announce Type: replace Abstract: LLM-based agents are increasingly moving towards proactivity: rather than awaiting instruction, they exercise agency to anticipate user needs and solve them autonomously.
By Gil Pasternak, Dheeraj Rajagopal, Julia White, Dhruv Atreja, Matthew Thomas, George Hurn-Maloney, Ash Lewis
The paper introduces a new benchmark that evaluates large language models (LLMs) on their agentic mathematical reasoning rather than just final answers. It aligns problem‑solving behaviors with a taxonomy of reusable mathematical atomic capabilities and includes planning, action, and feedback tasks in both textual and multimodal settings. Experiments show that models with similar end‑to‑end accuracy can have very different agentic profiles, highlighting the importance of process‑level evaluation.
By Jiayi Kuang, Yinghui Li, Yunze Song, Keyu Chen, Zhifeng Shen, Yangning Li, Yidong Wang, Di Yin, Ruizhi Qiao, Xing Sun, Kai Jin, Ying Shen, Liang Lin, Philip S. Yu
arXiv:2608. 07346v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: With the rapid advancement of large language models (LLMs), harnesses have become essential infrastructure for deploying agents across a wide range of domains.
By Haoning Wang, Mingxun Zhang, Chenyue Yu, Yingjun Shang, Xia Hu, Guanchu Wang, Na Zou
The paper introduces RuVerBench, a benchmark with 2,458 instances for evaluating the reliability of Large Language Models acting as judges (LaaJ) in verifying rubric compliance within agentic scenarios such as deep research and agentic coding. It systematically meta‑evaluates frontier LLMs, revealing that even the most advanced models perform well yet still produce substantial noise. The study also examines how prompt design, batching, and majority voting affect verification accuracy, noting that weaker models are more prompt‑sensitive, batched verification trades accuracy for efficiency, and majority voting offers diminishing returns.
By Yangda Peng, Yunjia Qi, Haotian Xia, Guanzhong He, Xintong Shi, Richeng Xuan, Songyuanyi Lu, Yixian Liu, Zhichao Hu, Yuhong Liu, Hao Peng