arXiv:2603. 14465v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: While Large Language Models (LLMs) have evolved into tool-using agents, they remain brittle in long-horizon interactions.
Machine-generated by The Flow from the publisher's headline and feed description — not written or checked by a human. The full article lives at arXiv AI.
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.
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.
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.
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. 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.