FaulT-Bench is a new benchmark comprising 200 network troubleshooting scenarios across eight topologies, designed to test large‑language‑model agents on realistic, noisy tickets that may contain false premises or incorrect fault claims. The benchmark includes 72 rewritten tickets that vary reporter confidence and detail, and evaluates agents via an automated harness that scores diagnoses on outcome, fix, and reasoning quality. Results show that while agents perform well on accurate tickets, they degrade sharply on healthy networks with misleading reports, highlighting the importance of ticket wording over content.
arXiv:2608.28790v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Technical operations teams resolve large volumes of incidents by synthesizing fragmented evidence from ticket text, historical cases, system logs, an...
By Shashidhar Reddy Javaji, Mohamed Trabelsi, Jin Cao, Huseyin Uzunalioglu
arXiv:2608. 12002v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Agents are increasingly considered for automating network operations and maintenance, where engineers must diagnose network faults, optimize configurations to enhance services, and reduce operational costs while acting under strict constraints.
By Xingyu Yan, Tingting Dai, Antonio De Domenico, Mohamed Sana, Nicola Piovesan, Changchang Li, Bowen Liu, Kun Jiang, Mengjie Zhang, Dingcheng Shan, Jing-Cheng Pang, Chenwei Wu, Sijie Wu, Lianying Chao, Haoran Cai, Jiantao Ye, Xubin Li, Simon Mark Lucas, Xin Chen
The paper "trajectory-judge: What Outcome-Only LLM Judges Miss on Agent Trajectories" examines the limitations of outcome-only evaluation for large language model agents. Using a deterministic tool‑using support‑desk environment with a scripted oracle policy and a fault injector, the authors compare five different judging approaches—programmatic rules, outcome‑only, step‑rubric at two model sizes, and a self‑consistency ensemble—on metrics such as detection, step localisation, fault typing, calibration, and cost across 400 trajectories. The study finds that outcome‑only judges miss many silent faults and generate false positives, while step‑rubric judges achieve higher recall with no false alarms but at greater cost, and that none of the judges read the final reply, allowing fabricated promises to evade detection.
"whyItMatters":"The findings highlight that current production‑default outcome‑only evaluations can overlook critical failures in agent behavior, underscoring the need for more nuanced, step‑level judging methods to ensure reliable LLM agent performance."
By Hadi Mohammadi
The paper introduces Traverse, a benchmark of 2,518 agent trajectories and 6,967 annotated mistakes across software engineering, computer use, and science tasks, revealing that failures often go unrecovered and can cause irreversible harm before a run is deemed successful. It shows that human judges struggle to detect the first mistake in most runs, while a 4‑billion‑parameter verifier called Scout can locate failures more effectively and improve task success when used to select among candidate runs. The study demonstrates that making failure detection inexpensive and reliable can enable long‑horizon agents to learn from their own mistakes and increase trustworthiness in autonomous AI.
By Salman Rahman, Yubin Kim, Mihir Parmar, A. Ali Heydari, Genglin Liu, Simon A. Lee, Weizhi Zhang, Arian Hosseini, Ahmed A. Metwally, Yuzhe Yang, Baharan Mirzasoleiman, Xin Liu, Pavel Izmailov, Saadia Gabriel, Mark Malhotra, Shwetak Patel, Daniel McDuff, Hamid Palangi
The paper introduces NetArtifactBench, a benchmark designed to evaluate whether AI agents can detect and repair inconsistencies in network experiment records while preserving supported claims. It tests 23 agent configurations on 52 instances with injected inconsistencies, finding an average pass rate of 65.3 % but no runtime exceeding 30 % for complex repairs that require recovering implicit relations and propagating changes across artifacts. The results highlight a clear distinction between local corrections and full record-level repair, leading the authors to argue that artifact integrity should be a primary design and evaluation criterion for AI agents in network systems.
By Tianzhu Zhang, Weichen Tao, Changgang Zheng, Yusheng Zheng, Long Chen, Xiaoyi Fan, Meikang Qiu