arXiv AI
AM-Bench: Understanding Agents under Task Underspecification across Models and Harnesses
Read the original on arXiv AI →The Flow has not summarised this story yet — read it at arXiv AI.
Related stories
arXiv AI
1d ago
Instructions Are Evidence, Not Objectives: Measuring Outcome Alignment of Agents
arXiv:2610.17757v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language model agents can follow complex human instructions to solve real-world tasks. In practice, however, initial instructions are often incom...
arXiv Computation and Language
1d ago
Interlock: From Local Correctness to Task Completion in Long-Horizon Agents
Interlock is a framework that transforms long‑horizon tasks into typed completion graphs, linking evidence, decisions, and required effects through grounding, coupling, and realization edges. It compiles these graphs into a resettable workspace, a public request, and an evaluation rubric, and uses source‑coverage, public‑input, and agent‑as‑judge reviews to ensure that all mandatory requirements are met. Fine‑tuning Qwen3.6 backbones on Interlock‑generated trajectories improves pass rates on AutomationBench, JobBench, and Harvey LAB, showing that the synthesized experience benefits external task environments.
arXiv AI
Jul 15
Do AI Agents Know When a Task Is Simple? Toward Complexity-Aware Reasoning and Execution
arXiv:2607. 13034v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language model (LLM) agents increasingly automate multi-step engineering and informatics workflows, yet they rarely ask how much effort a task actually requires.
arXiv Computation and Language
Sep 22
CCTU: A Benchmark for Tool Use under Complex Constraints
CCTU is a new benchmark designed to evaluate large language models (LLMs) on their ability to use tools under complex constraints. It includes 200 test cases that average seven constraint types and 4,700‑token prompts, covering resource, behavior, toolset, and response dimensions. An executable validation module performs step‑level checks, and nine state‑of‑the‑art LLMs were tested, revealing that none exceed a 20% task completion rate when strict constraints are enforced, with frequent violations and limited self‑refinement.
arXiv AI
Jul 14
AgentAbstain: Do LLM Agents Know When Not to Act?
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.
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.