arXiv AI
EvoGenUI-Bench: Evaluating LLMs as Multi-Turn Generative UI Assistants
Read the original on arXiv AI →The Flow has not summarised this story yet — read it at arXiv AI.
Related stories
arXiv AI
Aug 20
ComponentBench: Diagnosing Component-Level Failures in Computer-Use Agents
ComponentBench is a new benchmark that evaluates computer‑use agents at the component level on modern web UIs. It contains 97 canonical UI components and 2,910 programmatically verified tasks, along with cleaned human reference trajectories for measuring task success and interaction efficiency. The benchmark also offers a scalable pipeline for auditing structural difficulty and synthesizing failure analyses across tasks and component families.
arXiv AI
Jul 21
EvoGUI: An Evolution-Aware Benchmark for GUI State-Transition Understanding
arXiv:2607. 17050v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: GUI agents must reason about how actions transform interface states, but end-to-end success rates entangle this ability with perception, grounding, planning, and recovery.
arXiv AI
6d ago
The Hard Part Comes After Search: Benchmarking Web Agents on Synthesizing, Organizing, and Displaying Knowledge
The paper introduces KNOWS, a benchmark for evaluating web agents that act as assistants by retrieving, synthesizing, and presenting information across complex, multi-step browser tasks. It outlines a task design rubric, evaluation protocol combining deterministic checks with LLM judgments, and reports that current agents achieve only modest success, with the best performing agent succeeding on less than 3% of tasks. The study highlights significant gaps in agents’ tool use, visual understanding, and long‑horizon reasoning.
arXiv AI
4d ago
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.
arXiv AI
Aug 26
ToolRobustBench: Stage-Wise Perturbation Evaluation and Failure Diagnosis for Tool-Calling Agents
ToolRobustBench is a stage-wise diagnostic benchmark designed to evaluate and diagnose failures in tool‑calling agents, which are large language models that select tools, provide structured arguments, and interpret tool feedback. The benchmark aligns four perturbation families—tool‑interface, user‑intent, tool‑output/observation, and runtime‑environment—with the tool‑use pipeline, attributing failures to specific stages such as tool selection, schema grounding, argument binding, and feedback handling. Experiments across 15,456 instances, 7 models, and 16 local tools reveal that while overall performance is high, robustness degrades significantly, especially under tool‑output/observation perturbations, and mixed‑family perturbations produce non‑additive failure patterns.
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.