arXiv AI

When does a scaling result justify a different allocation? A critical review of resource-allocation evidence for AI systems

arXiv AI
Aug 7

HarnessOpt-Bench: Evaluating LLMs at Harness Optimization

arXiv:2608. 06301v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: As LLMs are increasingly deployed within agentic systems, their capabilities depend not only on the model weights but also on the harness: the prompts, tools, control flow, memory, and orchestration code surrounding them.

By Varun Ursekar, Apaar Shanker, Yash Maurya, Shehab Yasser, Vijay S. Kalmath, Veronica Chatrath, Yuan Xue
arXiv AI
Sep 18

The Organization of Inference: Information, Resource Constraints, and AI Production

The paper investigates how the distribution of capacity and task information across stages of AI production affects the economic value of inference. Using controlled workflow experiments on software‑engineering tasks, it finds that direct execution achieves a 59.6% success rate at token ceilings of 12,000 and 24,000, while information‑constrained planning improves from 36.2% to 51.2%. The study also shows that giving planners access to task issues boosts success, and that scaling token limits changes the balance between planning and execution workloads.

By Yukun Zhang, Kemu Xu, Yishen Chen
arXiv AI
Aug 11

The Scaling Paradox in Human-AI Collaboration

arXiv:2608. 00818v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: The discovery of scaling laws has highlighted the extraordinary potential of AI systems with a striking empirical pattern: as AI systems scale, their capabilities tend to improve predictably.

By Anyan Qi, Mengxin Wang
arXiv Computation and Language
Sep 2

HarnessDev: Can LLMs Create and Evolve Their Own Agent Harness?

arXiv:2609.01437v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: As agents move from research prototypes to deployed tools, their capability increasingly depends on model-external execution infrastructure, commonly...

By Yuhao Wu, Jingyuan Zhang, Jiajun Shi, Xinping Lei, Qingshui Gu, Yuxuan Zhang, Zexuan Wang, Chen He, Chen Huang, Maojia Song, Zhiyuan Zeng, Shaowen Wang, Jinkai Liu, Yunfeng Shi, Jiaheng Liu, Shen Yan, Wenhao Huang, Ge Zhang, Wenxuan Zhang
arXiv AI
Sep 21

Balance of Benchmarks: Semantic Density Reweighting for Task-Conditioned Model Comparison

The paper introduces Balance of Benchmarks (BoB), a framework that improves task-conditioned model comparison by weighting benchmark evidence based on semantic density, equating scores across varying difficulty levels, and pooling task-relevant residuals. BoB retains all eligible benchmark data while adjusting its influence, outperforming uniform averaging on the WildScores dataset with higher Spearman correlation, lower MAE, and better shortlist hit rates. The method also reduces ranking instability when benchmarks are repeated or paraphrased, and lowers retrospective regret in model selection.

By Jhen-Ke Lin, Hong-Yun Lin
arXiv AI
Sep 2

UniACE: A Unified Framework for Evaluating LLM Agentic Capabilities

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