arXiv AI By Hao He, Xueying Liu, Chris J. Kuhlman, Xinwei Deng

An Experimental Design Approach to Evaluating Agentic AI's Autonomous Model Discovery

Read the original on arXiv AI →

arXiv:2607. 06413v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language model coding agents increasingly perform open-ended data modeling and analysis.

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
6d ago

Agentick: A Unified Benchmark for General Sequential Decision-Making Agents

Agentick is a unified benchmark for sequential decision‑making agents that evaluates RL, LLM, VLM, hybrid, and human agents on 37 procedurally generated tasks across six capability categories, four difficulty levels, and five observation modalities via a single Gymnasium‑compatible interface. It includes a Coding API, oracle reference policies, pre‑built SFT datasets, a composable agent harness, and a live leaderboard. An evaluation of 27 configurations and over 90,000 episodes shows no single approach dominates, with GPT‑5 mini leading overall, PPO excelling in planning and multi‑agent tasks, and the reasoning harness boosting LLM performance by 3‑10×, while ASCII observations outperform natural language.

By Roger Creus Castanyer, Pablo Samuel Castro, Glen Berseth
arXiv AI
Aug 28

Don't Overthink, Don't Underthink: Toward Adaptive Reasoning in Agentic AI

The paper argues that large language models need adaptive reasoning rather than fixed reasoning budgets. It shows that over‑reasoning leads to high computational cost without accuracy gains, while under‑reasoning results in incorrect or incomplete solutions. The authors evaluate these failure modes on MATH‑500 and the GAIA benchmark, highlighting the need for dynamic reasoning allocation in agentic AI systems.

By Md Jueal Mia, M. Hadi Amini
arXiv AI
Aug 17

AI Research Preference Models

arXiv:2608. 13940v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: AI research agents (AIRA) can now propose, implement, and evaluate their own machine learning experiments, but progress on frontier tasks is throttled by cost: a candidate solution can be written in minutes, whereas evaluating it can take hours to days of GPU time.

By Thomas Simon Foster, Bassel Al Omari, Tingchen Fu, Thomas Mann, Carl Domond, Lucia Cipolina-Kun, Bhavul Gauri, Muna Aghamelu, Alexander D. Goldie, Eryk Helenowski, Jean-Christophe Gagnon-Audet, Alberto Pepe, Saba Nazir, Daniel Izcovich, Noam Levi, Rishi Hazra, Karen Hambardzumyan, Nicolas Baldwin, Xian Li, Martin Josifoski, Paris Giampouras, Masoud Jalili Sabet, Anya Sims, Hela Momand, Tatiana Shavrina, Despoina Magka, Jason Weston, Yulin Wang, Anirudh Goyal, Jo\~ao Henriques, Yoram Bachrach, Emily McMilin, Jakob Nicolaus Foerster
arXiv Machine Learning
Jul 7

MLS-Bench: A Holistic and Rigorous Assessment of AI Systems on Building Better AI

arXiv:2605. 08678v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Modern AI progress has been driven by ML methods that are generalizable across settings and scalable to larger regimes.

By Bohan Lyu, Yucheng Yang, Siqiao Huang, Jiaru Zhang, Qixin Xu, Xinghan Li, Xinyang Han, Yicheng Zhang, Huaqing Zhang, Runhan Huang, Kaicheng Yang, Zitao Chen, Wentao Guo, Junlin Yang, Xinyue Ai, Wenhao Chai, Yadi Cao, Ziran Yang, Kun Wang, Dapeng Jiang, Huan-ang Gao, Shange Tang, Chengshuai Shi, Simon S. Du, Max Simchowitz, Jiantao Jiao, Dawn Song, Chi Jin