arXiv AI By Sihao Liu, Ligeng Zhu, Zijian Zhang, Dongyun Zou, Zhengyang Zhang, Changye Li, Song Bian, Song Han, Tony Nowatzki

Humanize: Judgement Engineering for Agentic Coding

Read the original on arXiv AI →

Humanize is a multi‑agent workflow for agentic coding that uses explicit, mechanically enforced decisions—called judgement engineering—to separate planning, implementation, review, and learning. A human approves a plan contract, a builder agent implements it in rounds, and a reviewer agent from another vendor decides completion, with deterministic hooks and 72 mechanical gates ensuring that a defect survives only if both models miss it. The system has been deployed in over 68 versions in 108 days, earned 1,468 GitHub stars, and powered applications such as a 567‑file gem5 build‑system migration, Kernel Design Agents that excelled in MLSys 2026 contests, and Humanize Olympiad Agents that achieved top scores in multiple international competitions and high rankings on PutnamBench and Lean‑Eval. whyItMatters":"Humanize demonstrates that a structured, multi‑agent approach with explicit mechanical gates can improve reliability and performance in automated code generation, as evidenced by its adoption, star count, and success in competitive benchmarks."

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
Oct 12

Humanize Olympiad Agents: A Multi-Session Workflow for Olympiad Problem Solving with Solve, Review, Wiki, Verify

The paper introduces HOA (Humanize Olympiad Agent), a workflow that orchestrates multiple LLM agent sessions via reviewer feedback, a structured wiki, and a verifier to tackle olympiad problems. Using GPT‑5.6 Sol, HOA achieves perfect scores on the IMO, IPhO, and IOI 2026, near‑full marks on the IChO 2026, and solves all 672 PutnamBench problems, while ranking first on the Lean‑Eval leaderboard. With open models like Kimi‑K3, HOA still attains full scores on major olympiads and a gold‑level IChO score, showing that systematic feedback can close gaps between closed‑source and open‑source agents.

By Zhengyang Zhang, Jing Xiong, Hongzhou Lin, Juihui Chung, Zijian Zhang, Song Han, Sihao Liu, Ligeng Zhu
arXiv AI
Oct 12

AgentSWE: Can Coding Agents Build the Agent You Actually Want?

AgentSWE is a new benchmark for agent software engineering that evaluates coding agents across three lifecycle stages: creating an agent from a natural‑language requirement, editing existing agent codebases, and optimizing toward a measurable target. The benchmark consists of 25 commission‑style tasks, where builders iterate on a few illustrative cases and are then tested on held‑out cases that cover the full requirement, with hard pass/fail gates or objective‑based grading. Experiments show that current coding agents fail to meet the requirements, revealing common failure modes such as overfitting, incomplete runtimes, and unsupported completion claims.

By Jiahao Wang, Hongjin Qian, Yuyang Hu, Jiajun Zhang, Zheng Liu
arXiv AI
Aug 26

Beyond Executable Models: The Pufibara Agent Harness and the Modelica Agent Workflow Benchmark for Physical System Modeling

The paper introduces Pufibara, an agent harness designed to maintain engineering state and evidence across revisions in Modelica-based physical system modeling. It also presents a 232-task Modelica Agent Workflow Benchmark covering model repair, generation, and tuning, evaluated by an external benchmark-owned evaluator. Experiments show Pufibara outperforms Claude Code in task success and resource efficiency across two LLM backends.

By Zizhe Wang