arXiv AI By Zidi Xiu, David Q. Sun, Kevin Cheng, Maitrik Patel, Josh Date, Yizhe Zhang, Jiarui Lu, Omar Attia, Raviteja Vemulapalli, Oncel Tuzel, Meng Cao, Samy Bengio

ASTRA-bench: Evaluating Tool-Use Agent Reasoning and Action Planning with Personal User Context

Read the original on arXiv AI →

ASTRA-bench is a benchmark designed to evaluate AI agents’ reasoning and action planning in the presence of evolving personal context and an interactive toolbox. It generates 2,413 scenarios across four protagonists, incorporating longitudinal life events and varying levels of referential, functional, and informational complexity. Evaluation of leading models shows a marked drop in performance under high-complexity conditions, highlighting argument generation as a key bottleneck and exposing limitations in grounding reasoning within messy personal data.

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
Jun 10

T1-Bench: Benchmarking Multi-Scenario Agents in Real-World Domains

arXiv:2606. 11070v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Recent advances in reasoning and tool-calling capabilities of large language models (LLMs) have enabled increasingly capable agentic systems.

By Genta Indra Winata, Amartya Chakraborty, Yuzhen Lin, Swasthi P Rao, Shikhhar Siingh, Houhan Lu, Nadia Bathaee, Sriharsha Hatwar, Paresh Dashore, Anmol Jain, Kshitij Tayal, Xiuzhu Lin, Anirban Das, Sambit Sahu, Shi-Xiong Zhang
arXiv AI
Sep 30

AnyAct: Universal Action for Self-Evolving Agents

AnyAct introduces a universal action layer that consolidates diverse tool capabilities into a self‑evolving action space for AI agents operating in open‑world environments. It tackles the scale dilemma, tool non‑stationarity, and heterogeneous feedback by using hierarchical progressive retrieval and test‑time reliability evolution, while a heterogeneous observation grounding module unifies multi‑modal feedback. Evaluations on LiveMCPBench and the newly created OSMCP benchmark show state‑of‑the‑art performance, with significant gains in task success rate and reduced execution steps, especially for models with limited native capabilities.

By Lingrui Xu, Yangqin Jiang, Jiachang Zhang, Xubin Ren, Chao Huang
arXiv AI
Jun 12

The Illusion of Multi-Agent Advantage

arXiv:2606. 13003v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Prevailing wisdom posits that Multi-Agent Systems (MAS) are superior to Single-Agent Systems (SAS), citing advantages like context protection, parallel processing and distributed decision-making.

By Prathyusha Jwalapuram, Hehai Lin, Chuyuan Li, Fangkai Jiao, Sudong Wang, Yifei Ming, Zixuan Ke, Chengwei Qin, Giuseppe Carenini, Shafiq Joty
arXiv Computation and Language
Aug 31

ContextPilot: Teaching Agents for Proactive Context Management via Fine-grained RL

ContextPilot is a proactive context‑management framework designed to improve long‑horizon agentic reasoning with large language models. It expands the toolset to include planning, long‑term memory, and soft context offloading, and introduces a reinforcement‑learning strategy that focuses on critical editing decisions and assigns action‑level advantages. Experiments on long‑context QA and deep search tasks demonstrate that ContextPilot achieves stronger performance with a more compact working context, outperforming existing baselines across various base models and benchmarks.

By Zhuoshi Pan, Qizhi Pei, Junru Lu, Honglin Lin, H. Vicky Zhao, Di Yin, Xing Sun
arXiv AI
Oct 16

AlphaDiana: A Measurement System for Agents in Verifiable Reasoning Tasks

AlphaDiana is a measurement system designed to evaluate agents in verifiable reasoning tasks by providing modular interfaces for datasets, agents, environments, and scorers. It maintains harness-native control loops while separately managing file reuse and memory retention, enabling both macro-level analyses of entire agents and micro-level interventions on components such as tools, skills, and memory. Experiments on open-source models and harnesses across multiple benchmarks reveal that harnesses and component interventions do not consistently improve reasoning accuracy, and that token usage metrics must be interpreted alongside correctness.

By Zhanke Zhou, Zongze Li, Weikai Huang, Xuan Li, Chentao Cao, Xiao Feng, Xiangyu Lu, Jinbo Hu, Yi Xie, Nico Pelleriti, Shiyang Liu, Menghan Lu, Max Zimmer, Brando Miranda, Jiangchao Yao, Bo Liu, Sanmi Koyejo, Sebastian Pokutta, Bo Han