When to Compile a Computer-Use Agent? Measuring Payback and Making Compilation Decisions for Token Efficiency
Read the original on arXiv AI →The Flow has not summarised this story yet — read it at arXiv AI.
The Flow has not summarised this story yet — read it at arXiv AI.
arXiv:2607. 04542v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Every LLM agent run re-derives its behavior token by token on a frontier model: brilliant, expensive, slow, and unbounded.
arXiv:2609.35760v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: When a large language model (LLM) agent executes the same task, token consumption can vary by over an order of magnitude across runs. The age...
arXiv:2608. 02680v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Tool-using language-model agents repeatedly rediscover procedures they have already executed, producing traces that mix reusable structure with retries, exploration, accidental ordering, and repeated lookups.
arXiv:2603.01209v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: In CodeAct, language-model agents write Python that calls tools and use execution feedback to choose actions. Persistent runtimes preserve Python v...
arXiv:2607. 13034v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language model (LLM) agents increasingly automate multi-step engineering and informatics workflows, yet they rarely ask how much effort a task actually requires.
arXiv:2609.23058v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Current agent runtimes that plan before acting generally execute a step once it becomes ready. We present LazyAgent, a unified execution framework for...