arXiv AI By Jingjie Ning, Xueqi Li, Yi Lu, Yibo Kong

AgentProofBench: Benchmarking Reusable Verifiers for Web Agents

Read the original on arXiv AI →

AgentProofBench is a benchmark for reusable verification of web agents, linking frozen acceptance rules to execution from identical saved openings. It covers 97 tasks across 79 families and four web services, and provides paired tests that measure how well programs retain correctness after reuse and rebuild. Experiments with DeepSeek Flash and Pro show high retention rates and identify specific families where deployment-state panel correctness is critical.

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 AI
Jul 1

An Executable Benchmarking Suite for Tool-Using Agents

arXiv:2605. 11030v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Closed-loop tool-using agents are increasingly evaluated in executable web, code, and micro-task environments, but benchmark reports often conflate workloads, action-generating drivers, and the evidence admitted for systems-facing claims.

By Zhiqing Zhong, Zhijing Ye, Jiamin Wang, Xiaodong Yu
arXiv AI
Oct 23

VerifierBench: Benchmarking the Generation of Executable Verifiers for LLM Agents

The paper introduces VerifierBench, a benchmark comprising 222 tasks from six agent benchmarks and 4,993 hidden test cases designed to evaluate the generation of executable verifiers by large language model agents. It presents Verifier4Verifier (V4V), a six-check audit that screens source verifiers and test suites, and reports that across 19 models, normalized balanced accuracy ranges from 10.6 to 62.1, with generated verifiers more reliably rejecting invalid solutions than accepting valid ones. Case studies highlight that many false rejections stem from verifiers that accept no tested solution, revealing unsupported assumptions about solution formats, tool use, and code changes that exclude valid solutions, and underscore the need to test both acceptance of correct solutions and other permissible solutions.

By Jianing Yin, Ziyi Chen, Hao Wang, Yiyou Sun, Zijian Jin, Dawn Song, Daoan Zhang
arXiv AI
Oct 9

TestJack: Should you trust the results in coding benchmarks? Agentic Coding Benchmarks Auditing via Evaluator Evolution

TestJack is a scalable framework that audits large language model (LLM) coding agents by generating new tests for each trial, focusing on prompt requirements that may be violated. It keeps only the tests passed by the ground‑truth patch and re‑examines failures, providing replayable evidence for each confirmed error. In experiments across six model backends and five benchmarks, TestJack found that 34.4% of trials deemed correct actually violated task requirements, reducing the overall resolution rate from 50.6% to 33.2%.

By Shuangjie Yao, Hao Wang, Koushik Sen, Simin Chen, Baishakhi Ray, Dawn Song