← Back to all news
arXiv AI By Jenny Yang, Elizabeth Proehl, Anjan Bharadwaj, Emily Fan, Charlotte Cole, James Kim, Noam Brown, Phoebe Thacker, Amelia Glaese, Tejal Patwardhan

LifeVal: Evaluating AI Model Performance on Personalized Agentic Consumer Tasks

Read the original on arXiv AI →

LifeVal is a new benchmark that evaluates AI model performance on personalized agentic consumer tasks, covering over 1.7 trillion US dollars in annual willingness-to-pay across 148 task categories such as managing finances and finding childcare. The benchmark was built using a survey of more than 3,800 consumers and cross‑referenced with national time‑use studies. Task creators, who met strict expertise thresholds, designed AI evaluation tasks personalized with real ChatGPT conversations, memories, reference files, and personal context, and all tasks underwent at least three rounds of human quality control before inclusion.

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.

Related stories

arXiv AI
Oct 5

How Do AI Agents Spend Your Money? Analyzing and Predicting Token Consumption in Agentic Coding Tasks

The paper presents a systematic study of token consumption in AI agents performing coding tasks. It finds that agentic tasks are far more expensive—about 1000 times more tokens than code reasoning or chat—primarily due to input tokens, and that token usage varies wildly, with accuracy peaking at moderate costs. Models differ significantly in efficiency, and current frontier models cannot reliably predict their own token usage, often underestimating it.

By Longju Bai, Zhemin Huang, Xingyao Wang, Jiao Sun, Rada Mihalcea, Erik Brynjolfsson, Alex Pentland, Jiaxin Pei
llmsagents
More like this →
arXiv AI
Sep 4

Efficient Test-Time Adaptation through Human-AI Interaction

The paper introduces Test-Time Adaptation through Human‑Agent Interaction (TAHI), a method that uses iterative human feedback to adapt AI agents to individual users’ criteria. By integrating cross‑session interaction data into agent context and weights, and building an evolving rubric module, the authors demonstrate that agents can improve task success by 4.5–20.9% after only a few interactions. The evolving rubric also serves as a scalable annotation tool, detecting 16.0–22.3% more failures than language models or humans alone, and personalized agents can even generalize improvements up to 8.8% across users.

By Zora Zhiruo Wang, Apurva Gandhi, Rulin Shao, Aspen Chen, Jonas Mueller, Zhiqi Liang, Jett Chen, Michael Ryan, Qianou Ma, Luxi He, Zhoujun Cheng, Andre He, Seungone Kim, Jiayi Geng, Mingqian Zheng, Weiwei Sun, Zheyuan Zhang, Xinran Zhao, Yike Wang, Abe Hou, Liwei Jiang, Pang Wei Koh, Diyi Yang, Graham Neubig, Daniel Fried
agents
More like this →