Agent 进展

Differentiable programming connects scientific computation with gradient-based inference, learning and design. Extending these capabilities across a heterogeneous software ecosystem requires specialized effort to implement derivatives, integrate interfaces and evaluate quality. AI coding agents can accelerate this transformation, but translating their capabilities into useful scientific software requires identifying research needs and evaluating how well implementations meet them. We present an environment for agent-driven evolution of differentiable scientific software that connects demand identification, development and quality evaluation. A unified differentiation interface exposes reusable derivative rules alongside existing numerical routines, allowing research tasks to share these capabilities. Research requirements guide development, with implementations assessed through independent derivative checks, workflow tests and performance evaluation. Validated software, research programs and tests become shared resources for subsequent studies. We construct and validate automatic differentiation extensions across 20 packages spanning physical, chemical and biological modeling, with research workflows demonstrating reuse across tasks. Benchmarks demonstrate computational savings over finite differences in gradient evaluation and complete parameter estimation. Research-driven revisions make previously unsupported workflows differentiable, correct derivatives of scientific observables and eliminate redundant computation. Quantum-control and thermal-design studies revise objectives in response to physical evaluation, improving designs while reusing existing derivatives. This work provides a practical approach to expanding differentiable programming across established scientific software and organizing AI agents around the recursive improvement of a shared computational ecosystem.

Deep time-series forecasting models have rapidly diversified, yet adapting them to a specific task still requires extensive expert effort in model selection, mechanism diagnosis, architecture design, implementation, and evaluation. Existing AutoML methods are constrained by predefined search spaces, while general-purpose LLM research agents lack reliable control over experimental protocols and model promotion. We introduce EvoCast, a fully autonomous research-agent system for iterative forecasting architecture evolution. EvoCast first establishes and diagnoses a task-specific baseline through executed mechanism ablations, then generates evidence-grounded research directions from dataset characteristics, diagnostic results, prior rounds, and failure records. Its central design, cognition-authority separation, assigns open-ended hypothesis generation and code implementation to LLM agents, while deterministic program authorities control source-edit boundaries, canonical evaluation, and promotion decisions. Experimental outcomes are accumulated as evidence to guide subsequent rounds. Results show that EvoCast completes complex architecture modifications with higher implementation success and lower agent-side token/time cost, and develops task-specific architectures that outperform selected baselines, strong forecasting models, and agent baselines in three real-world forecasting cases. The code is available at https://github.com/18e0-x/EvoCast.

Routine complete blood counts (CBCs) could yield new biomarkers, but the private records needed to evaluate candidates cannot be shared with frontier language model agents that excel at discovery. We distilled the evidence held in the Clalit Health Services panel of over 5.4 million patients into a released scoring tool: for each of 13 immune-mediated diseases, a graph attention network was trained inside the data boundary to predict the case-control AUC of candidate CBC expressions, and only the trained weights were released. The tool grounds an agent's propose-score-refine loop in real-world data without exposing any patient data. In external validation, agent-discovered expressions improved on their literature-seeded starting points by a median of 4.18 AUC percentage points, and across three independent cohorts, reranking the candidates of three frontier research tools improved on their first choices in most comparisons, with gains that varied by cohort. The released scorer supports privacy-preserving biomarker hypothesis generation.

An agent with long-term memory can answer from a record it should no longer use, such as a plan the user later cancelled. We ask what a memory store must expose for an agent to know this before retrieving anything, and we score that judgment on its own, as metamemory monitoring. Readers see only a value-free summary: record counts by lifecycle state and a list of attribute names. Each of 148 questions is asked against three versions of one store that differ in one attribute, so wording cannot give the answer away. What a model adds depends on the length of that list. On the short lists the benchmark's ground truth produces (2.6 names on average), none of five language models reliably beats a cosine-similarity lookup over the names, and the three stronger ones are equivalent to it within 0.05. Under a control that fixes counts and list length, none is reliably above it and none is shown equivalent. On lists longer than the stores we tested write, padded to 60 names, the lookup loses 0.18; GPT-5.6 Luna and Sol lose 0.06 to 0.07 and lead it by 0.13 to 0.14, while the other three fall with it. The lead holds for Sol against a sibling padded to the same length and counts. Reworded to share no word with the names, the lookup loses 0.02 and one stronger reader edges 0.04 ahead. On the short lists the three stronger readers lead only where the summary counts a state without naming it, and one count feature closes that lead within a question, though not when items are pooled. The backends we tested omit or misstate this information: under FR-Bank's own metadata, GPT-4.1 mini, Haiku 4.5 and the lookup fall from 0.73, 0.82 and 0.75 to 0.60, 0.71 and 0.59. In these tests, what the store wrote down limited every reader we gave it to. All stores are synthetic; control, whether a better judgment yields a better answer, is left to a later study.

Concurrent AI coding agents create a coordination problem in which cheap signals may prioritize work, but only an executable checker can establish the property being claimed. We study this separation through a property-scoped verification contract and MERGEGYM, a three-track benchmark for open-time scope forecasting, replay- conditioned conflict resolution, and scheduling. On a stratified 715-pair lineage set (167 textual conflicts), 79 conflicts (47.3%) occur despite disjoint authored file sets. This is an operationally important proxy mismatch expected from three-way merge: authored PR diffs are measured against PR-specific bases, whereas the checker compares both heads to their common merge base. A standalone lineage-union rule reaches held-out AUROC 0.877; a 12-feature logistic model reaches 0.882 [0.845, 0.917] with PR-AUC 0.661, and an untuned random forest on the same decision-time features reaches 0.902 [0.875, 0.928] with PR-AUC 0.701. At a 33.3% held-out replay budget, the logistic and random-forest models recover 81.2% and 82.9% of conflicts, respectively. Patch reconstruction succeeds for 48/79 zero- overlap conflicts and all 48 become clean; the other 31 cases are inconclusive, so this check validates the expected three-way-merge explanation rather than claiming a new Git mechanism. In T1, a zero-shot LLM reaches AUC 0.704 and LLM-plus- metadata fusion 0.740. In T3, a decision-time gate de-overlaps a median 91.7% of labeled scope collisions at 65.0% makespan inflation under frozen-label replay. Because local git merge-tree replay is already cheap in our logs (median 0.02 s), we do not claim that lineage triage saves this checker alone: when exact replay is cheap, verify everything. All empirical guarantees in this paper remain limited to textual mergeability or the explicitly stated frozen-label scheduling target.

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed to simulate human behavior, acting as computational replicas of human subjects. Yet the lived psychological experience of humans is difficult to benchmark, particularly as it unfolds over time. We introduce a psychometric benchmark for computational replicas: personas that carry a fixed identity through an evolving sequence of events. Built entirely from published norms and meta-analytic effects, the benchmark scores two dimensions of psychological realism. The first, internal validity, quantifies whether generated trajectories reproduce the internal structure of repeated human measurement: distributions, the between- versus within-person variance partition, temporal dependence, and range. The second, external validity, quantifies whether replicas recover established trait, state, and indicator relations. Across 36 open-weight and proprietary LLMs from nine developers (1B-671B parameters), most recover the direction of established relations (84.3% mean agreement) and the variance partition (26 of 34), yet the within-person correlation and distributional structure elude recovery. Internal validity is independent of scale and capability: a mid-size open LLM (Gemma-3-27B) strikes the best trade-off between the two dimensions. The benchmark is a precondition for using computational replicas in causal inference across domains (e.g., marketing, healthcare), and identifies within-person grounding as the central challenge ahead.

Recursive self-improvement (RSI) relies on evaluation feedback to assess progress and guide further research, yet repeatedly running complex benchmarks is costly and slows iteration. Human experts reduce this cost by selecting benchmark subsets or designing compact suites. We ask whether AI agents can automate this design process and introduce EvalResearchBench (ERB), a benchmark for autonomous evaluation research. Given target materials, development references, candidate APIs, and fixed time and API budgets, an agent called the researcher selects or synthesizes tasks, implements graders, and revises them in pilot tests before freezing an executable evaluator for coding, co-work, and reasoning. We study 9 researchers and 13 candidate models and compare each frozen evaluator with 14 target benchmarks on score concordance and pairwise agreement. The best evaluators order about 75% of candidate pairs as the targets do, below the 91% ceiling set by disagreements among the targets. No researcher leads on every metric, and the best evaluator on development targets is not the best on sealed targets hidden from the researcher. A human-designed sample of public tasks remains a strong baseline, and the evaluator with the lowest recorded execution cost attains the highest pairwise agreement. Agents repair tasks and graders through pilot feedback, yet their evaluators can still truncate answers, exhaust the evaluation budget, or let a few questions dominate a domain score.

Large language models increasingly mediate tool use in Model Context Protocol (MCP) systems, where adversarial influence may enter through user instructions, tool schemas, tool outputs, or protocol messages. Existing benchmarks often evaluate deployed agents, conflating model susceptibility with guardrails, orchestration, and general task capability. We introduce COPEX (COntext Provider EXploitation), a controlled benchmark that isolates the model as an MCP client by fixing the surrounding agent stack and varying only the tool-selecting model. COPEX covers 25 attack types instantiated as 125 scenarios across four entry surfaces: model/agent, client, server/tool, and transport. Across nine models and 3,375 trials, the mean attack success rate is 64.4%, with surface-level means ranging from 58.3% to 71.4%. Some client- and transport-level attacks succeed partly outside the model's observation or control, separating system exposure from model susceptibility. Combined input and context scanning reduces mean attack success by 49.6% on an eight-attack defense subset relative to the undefended setting. The benchmark is available at https://github.com/inspire-center/copex.

LLM-based agents are increasingly capable of generating complex 3D structures, with the potential to reshape how objects are designed and realized in the physical world. Yet, producing elegant geometry is fundamentally different from producing objects that can be built and perform their intended functions. Existing evaluations largely focus on geometric quality while overlooking physical realizability. We introduce LMBuild, a benchmark for evaluating LLM agents on generating buildable and functional structures. LMBuild represents generated objects as assembled structures comprising part decompositions, joints, materials, and sequences. To support reproducible evaluation, we provide a unified framework consisting of: (1) an interactive environment in which agents can use tools to retrieve, create, and place components to construct objects; (2) a curated benchmark that repurposes established CAD datasets and augments them with knowledge from Wikipedia; and (3) a evaluation framework covering structural soundness, functional affordance, design quality, and physical realization. Evaluations across 30 systems reveal several intriguing findings: (a) Soundness and alignment are no longer the primary bottlenecks for frontier closed-source models, while functional affordance and physical operability remain substantially more challenging; (b) stronger models more effectively create new components, whereas weaker models tend to rely on retrieval; and (c) providing functional specifications substantially improves part completeness, kinematics, and physical operability. These results show that generating real-world structures requires deeper reasoning about functional affordances, mechanics, and designing and creating novel components. We expect LMBuild to provide a foundation for measuring progress and incentivizing research toward agents that generate buildable and functional structures.

Early-stage computational drug discovery requires coordinating heterogeneous scientific tools across multi-step workflows. We present a lightweight, tool-augmented framework in which a locally deployable compact language model plans calls to 18 modular tools. A Unified Molecular Schema maintains shared molecular records, while a plug-in interface supports tool replacement and extension. We construct 1,263 manually refined query-plan pairs through workflow-graph path coverage and apply LoRA fine-tuning to three compact model families. Under the query-level split, all fine-tuned models generate fully parseable and schema-compliant plans on 47 held-out cross-group queries. Llama 3.2-3B achieves a tool-selection F1 of 0.998, sequence exact match of 0.979, and argument F1 of 0.960. Under the stricter workflow-grouped split, which excludes identical ordered tool sequences across partitions, sequence exact match reaches 0.452 to 0.548, highlighting the remaining difficulty for compact models in generating complete workflow paths unseen during training. These results demonstrate the feasibility of compact, locally deployable planning while identifying compositional generalization as an important direction for further improvement.

Agent harnesses are systems that coordinate model calls, tool use, and task execution to help large language models complete complex tasks. To meet task requirements and address failures, these systems are often iteratively refined by amending and patching their instructions, tools, and workflows, continuously increasing harness complexity. It is therefore unclear whether some resulting harness modules are redundant, introducing substantial token overhead with little, if any, performance gain. Inspired by neural network pruning, in this paper, we study harness pruning as a means of striking a better balance between task performance and token cost. We propose SHarP (Saliency-based Harness Pruning), a simple yet effective pruning strategy based on the saliency of each harness module with respect to performance and efficiency. Specifically, we first identify tools, instructions, and supporting mechanisms as components that can be individually disabled. We then estimate the saliency of each module by ablating it and assessing its task performance and token cost relative to the full set of single-module ablations. Modules with the smallest contribution to performance or largest computational overhead are subsequently pruned. Our evaluation across various harnesses on held-out validation sets reveals a surprising finding: most harnesses that we studied are highly redundant and can maintain comparable performance and efficiency even after a substantial portion of their modules are pruned. Our pruning approach and empirical findings provide new perspectives on agent harness design and optimization.

Although reinforcement learning (RL) post-training repairs the localized segmental errors of zero-shot text-to-speech (TTS), arriving at a working recipe still relies on tedious manual tuning, and whether LLM agents can take over this research pipeline is unclear. We investigate this question with AgenticTTS-Forge, a collaborative workflow that structures human guidance and agentic execution around a shared workspace, applied to CosyVoice2-0.5B. To measure what the agent automates, we audit its trajectory stage by stage against the published recipe. To measure what it exploits, we score its policies with held-out observers hidden from the agent. Our results show that the agent recovers an underspecified recipe, improves it, and, when gains stall, surveys the literature unprompted and pivots from the LM carrier to the flow carrier, halving Bad cases. However, its autonomy exposes three traps across the data, proxy, and algorithm axes: the held-out set leaks through a channel the contract never reads, a self-shaped reward inflates the proxy where it is scored, and separately tuned policies do not compose additively. These findings show that the binding constraint is measurement rather than reasoning, and can inform the design of harnesses whose contracts read every channel the agent does.

Large language model (LLM) agents are increasingly deployed in tool-augmented environments, but their reliance on external inputs makes them highly vulnerable to prompt injection attacks that can hijack task objectives. Existing safety alignment methods rely on static expert trajectories or preference optimization, limiting their ability to generalize to adaptive attack patterns. In this work, we propose Self-Reflection Fine-Tuning (SRFT), a training framework that enables agents to improve robustness by learning from their own failure experiences under adversarial conditions. Instead of passively imitating expert behaviors, SRFT exposes the agent to compromised trajectories constructed via injected attacks, and leverages an expert model to generate structured self-reflection reasoning that contrasts unsafe and optimal actions. This reflective supervision teaches the agent to identify malicious instructions, reason about their consequences, and maintain alignment with the original user intent. We instantiate this framework in SR-Agent, built on Llama-3.1-8B-Instruct and Qwen3-8B, and evaluate it on both static and adaptive prompt injection benchmarks. Experimental results show that SRFT substantially reduces attack success rates while preserving task performance, and demonstrates strong generalization under adaptive attacks. These findings suggest that learning from failure via self-reflection is a promising direction for building robust and secure LLM agents. Our code is released at https://github.com/Eden-Wang1710/srft-repo.

Building interactive simulators from real-world observations is a promising way to scale embodied data, but current pipelines still rely heavily on manual environment construction and calibration. We study whether frontier foundation models and coding agents can automate this process end to end. We formulate autonomous video-to-simulation as a software engineering task in which an agent observes an embodied video, constructs the corresponding simulated environment and robot behavior, and iteratively refines the result through execution feedback. To evaluate this capability, we introduce Video2World, a benchmark comprising 222 reconstruction instances derived from 189 robot and human demonstration videos. Video2World measures reconstructed worlds along geometric fidelity, dynamic fidelity, and functional correctness, capturing spatial perception, physical reasoning, and executable interaction. Evaluating 9 frontier coding-agent systems reveals a sharp improvement in Task success beginning with Claude Opus 5, rising from below 5% to over 15%, while substantial gaps to human-assisted reconstruction remain. We further find that worlds that look better could work worse: better visual fidelity does not always lead to higher task success. This echoes the broader gap between perceptual realism and factual correctness observed in generative models.

Graphical consoles offer a practical interface for medical acquisition assistance, allowing agents to work through the controls and visual feedback used by human operators. Reliable assistance requires linking on-screen anatomy to acquisition decisions that determine what image evidence becomes available next. We introduce MedImageOSWorld, a benchmark for evaluating this capability in simulated CT, MR, and ultrasound consoles. Using screenshots and mouse-and-keyboard actions, agents configure protocols, plan acquisitions, inspect the resulting images, and make corrective adjustments across seven capability levels, from console operation to feedback-driven control. Evaluation combines task-specific workflow checks with hidden anatomical ground truth to assess procedural completion and acquisition outcomes separately. A common evaluation protocol specifies episode conditions and interaction budgets, while recorded trajectories support analysis of how agents observe, act, and respond to acquisition feedback. Across eleven open-weight agents, success rates range from 3.0 to 25.0 on a 0-100 scale while workflow-progress rates reach 21.5-74.5: agents complete much of the console workflow but rarely acquire the intended anatomy. Success collapses between perception and planning, from 79-90% at the lowest three levels for the best agent to at most 12% for millimetre-level planning and 0% for closed-loop control among open-weight agents. Two proprietary agents reach success rates of about 34 and exceed the best open-weight agent mainly in acquisition quality (61 versus 42). MedImageOSWorld provides a controlled setting for studying whether general-purpose GUI agents can translate visual observations into effective medical acquisition decisions.

Large language models (LLMs) increasingly serve as autonomous agents that invoke external tools. However, this capability introduces tool hallucination, selecting incorrect tools or generating invalid calls. Existing mitigation methods report substantial improvements, yet we identify a previously overlooked failure mode that we term Hallucination Escape. These methods reduce hallucination on the tool configuration they are tuned on but increase it on other configurations, canceling out the gain. We further investigate this phenomenon and find that hallucination rises sharply when a model's intrinsic tool-use tendencies conflict with the current tool configuration, and that existing methods reinforce rather than suppress these tendencies, which in turn contributes to hallucination escape. Building on these findings, we propose EscapeGuard, a training-free inference-time method that combines conflict-aware gating with configuration-derived attention enhancement to mitigate tool hallucination while preventing hallucination escape. Across six benchmarks on various models, EscapeGuard reduces tool-selection hallucination by 9.0 pp and suppresses hallucination escape, lowering the cross-configuration mean by 23.7 pp and achieving an 89.1% net improvement in paired-query evaluation. We hope this work can encourage evaluation beyond a single tool configuration and pave the way for more reliable tool-using LLM agents.

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) requires frequent imaging-based assessment, yet interpretation of modalities such as wireless capsule endoscopy (WCE) and intestinal ultrasound remains heavily dependent on specialist expertise. Vision-Language Models (VLMs) demonstrate significant potential in multimodal medical image analysis, but their clinical adoption is hindered by their insufficient domain-specific reasoning, susceptibility to hallucination, scarcity of high quality training data in fine-grained diagnostics and limited interpretability. We introduce ARISE (Adaptive Agentic Reasoning with Image-grounded Self-Evaluation), an autonomous planning framework that models few-shot medical image understanding as a sequential agentic workflow. ARISE structures agent execution into a transparent 5-stage workflow: hypothesis generation, image-grounded evidence summarization, evidence-conditioned refinement, symbolic verification, and final diagnosis. We apply ARISE to IBD assessment across two independent patient cohorts: wireless capsule endoscopy (WCE) images for Crohn's disease and B-mode ultrasound data for ulcerative colitis. ARISE consistently improves diagnostic performance over baseline VLMs while exposing where reasoning succeeds or fails, providing a more interpretable basis for clinical decision support and realistic deployment.

Agents built on large language models (LLMs) build and run software through tool calls. A call reaches its program through several hops, and any hop can change the call without notice. When the changed call fails, the agent retries a correct call, which costs users time and money. Benchmarks and failure analyses do not see the change, because they read the call and its result but not what a hop received. We define intent-execution correspondence (IEC) as the property that the executed action matches the action the emitted call denotes under the tool contract. Our protocol observes what each hop received without executing the call, and names the first hop that changed it by the receiver's own parser. IntAct then delivers the call in a form that this hop cannot alter, or refuses the call. We build IEC-Bench from the changes observed in real-world use, with chains of dependent calls under the execution paths of 4 widely-used harnesses. In 47,828 shell calls within production sessions, Claude Code's Bash tool changes 12.0% of the calls that carry code, escape sequences, or long text. For 80.7% of the calls whose backslashes are changed, the wrong action runs without any reported error. All 10 measured harnesses change a call. Trajectory-based judgment attributes 95.1% of the production failures to the LLM, although the path caused more than half of them. On IEC-Bench, the path raises the token cost per passed task 2.4 times (up to 12.3 times). A hop that changes a call also hides the changes after it, so 55.1% of the failures on one path appear only after its first hop is repaired. IntAct, deployed in a commercial product, recovers 79.2% of the failures with a changed call. Harnesses should therefore be designed and tested hop-by-hop to ensure a correct call executes as intended or is refused.

Recent advances in artificial intelligence-radio access network (AI-RAN) are placing large language model (LLM)-driven agents within the open RAN (O-RAN) control hierarchy. A promising deployment for this agentic AI-RAN co-locates LLM inference with physical-layer (PHY) communication processing over the same accelerated compute pool for infrastructure sharing, data locality, and low control latency. However, this co-location induces bidirectional control-compute coupling, as the agent competes with PHY processing for compute, while its reasoned gNB control actions may alter future PHY workload and hence the compute available to its next inference. To this end, this article proposes the control-compute contract, a coordination protocol linking AI-RAN workload governance with O-RAN control execution. Specifically, we first expose direct compute contention on an over-the-air (OTA) O-RAN testbed, where continuous LLM inference increases the PHY decoding time approximately eightfold. We then formulate the contract as three protocol rules with operator-requirement protection, and map it onto O-RAN and AI-RAN functions as a five-stage workflow. Afterward, an OTA-calibrated case study of simulated uplink gNB control indicates that the contract keeps the proportion of slots violating the PHY time budget below $0.9%$, against $20.7%$ under ungoverned co-location, while achieving faster gNB control than a fixed compute reservation benchmark. Finally, we identify several open issues and outlooks for its practical deployment.

Agentic large language model (LLM) systems are commonly implemented as an LLM in a loop with Planning, Memory, Tools, and Control Flow. This application-focused view connects agentic LLM research with deployable systems and leaves open how such systems should be evaluated beyond end-to-end task success. Building on this view, we define agentic cognitive depth as a trajectory-level profile across five operational criteria. The profile contains context sensitivity ($C$), temporal continuity ($T$), multimodal coordination ($M$), adaptive interaction ($A$), and metacognitive monitoring ($Mc$). The first four criteria measure how well Control Flow, Memory, Tools, and Planning are used across a trajectory. The fifth measures whether the system monitors and regulates the full run. For each criterion, we give operational proxies and a perturbation procedure, then connect the profile to the agent's world model. We provide the structure needed to extend benchmarks such as GAIA, SWE-bench, WebArena, and TRIP-Bench with per-criterion diagnostics. Symbolic verifiers, structured memory, planner coupling, and tool constraints provide practical ways to build and test these capacities.

Large language models (LLMs) have progressively evolved into the core of autonomous agents. Building on this progress, LLM-based multi-agent systems (MAS) coordinate multiple agents into a synergistic team to accomplish complex tasks that exceed the capabilities of individual agents. The effectiveness of such systems depends not only on the agents themselves, but also on how collaboration mechanisms are designed and organized. Note that real-world collaboration is typically partially observable, where each agent can only access partial information about the environment due to physical or privacy-related constraints. However, many existing multi-agent benchmarks assume global observability, and leave limited support for systematically evaluating collaboration mechanisms. To bridge this gap, we introduce MASBench, a multi-agent collaboration benchmark designed under partially observable constraints. It is organized into three progressive task categories: Reasoning, Scheduling, and Game. Through this structure, we progressively evaluate three representative collaboration mechanisms: Protocol, Memory, and Routing. MASBench further provides deterministic evaluation metrics, including performance score, communication cost, and cost effectiveness, to characterize both collaboration outcomes and communication overhead. Experiments across diverse LLM backbones and mechanism configurations offer empirical guidance for effective MAS design. Code is available at: https://github.com/BUPT-GAMMA/MASBench

Inference systems determine how fast and how cheaply language models can be served, so making them faster has direct practical value. However, prior work focuses mostly on optimizing certain parts such as kernels or memory within the large system. In this work, we take a holistic approach and apply agentic self-evolution to optimize the whole system end-to-end. Our SEIS (Self-Evolving Inference Systems) autonomously optimizes the entire mini-sglang engine without human intervention through iterative sessions with inherited experiences and code changes. Serving Qwen3-0.6B on H100, the resulting engine reaches 3.27X the throughput of the original mini-sglang implementation and beats SOTA engines like vLLM, TensorRT-LLM, and SGLang in the single-request workload. The correctness of the optimized inference engine by SEIS is tested in terms of numerical difference and downstream accuracy on math and long-context retrieval tasks. The code and session histories show that the speedup comes from redesigning the whole engine and that building on earlier sessions beats independent attempts. These results suggest that agentic self-evolution can optimize a complex system end-to-end. The evaluation also has to evolve with the engine, and letting agents evolve it is a natural next step.

Reinforcement fine-tuning (RFT) is increasingly used in applications where large language models (LLMs) interact with humans and other agents. Here we use social deduction games to study how RFT changes LLMs' social behaviour. We let fine-tuned and base LLM agents play hidden-role games that require hidden-state inference, social reading and vote steering. Our results show that LLM agents do not reliably acquire social-deduction ability by directly optimizing terminal win--loss outcomes, suggesting that final game results provide a sparse and noisy signal for socially interactive learning. However, RFT is particularly effective at improving social reading, including tasks that require agents to infer hidden roles from public discussion, update beliefs over time and predict other agents' future decisions. We further show that RFT can also improve social influence, including tasks that require agents to steer votes, team approvals and collective decisions, although these gains depend more strongly on behaviourally specific rewards and structured interaction settings. Finally, we show that LLMs' ability to play social deduction games can be further improved through multi-agent social-cognitive reinforcement fine-tuning, which combines social-reading and social-influence signals during same-side multi-agent training. These learned behaviours also receive more favourable human evaluations of strategic competence, persuasiveness and social usefulness. Together, these results enrich our understanding of how RFT changes LLMs' social behaviour and provide a step toward a behavioural learning theory for machine social intelligence.

Recent advances in Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable capabilities in web front-end execution, with browser-based game generation emerging as a particularly prominent frontier. While previous efforts frequently rely on complex multi-turn workflows or focus on static game evaluation benchmarks, this work targets direct end-to-end real-world game synthesis driven by coding agents. However, generating complex games directly from sparse user queries often forces coding agents to make underspecified assumptions, yielding incomplete mechanics, disconnected gameplay flows, and limited visual aesthetics. To resolve this issue, this paper presents GameGo, a scalable framework that systematically transforms brief game seeds into comprehensive Product Requirements Documents grounded in industry game-development practices. To retain core gameplay constraints without restricting design exploration, GameGo uses task-specific dynamic compression to maximize information density while preserving instruction following. Based on this pipeline, GameGoData is constructed with 55,060 development trajectories across 2D, 2.5D, and 3D games, alongside GameGoBench, a benchmark comprising 124 diverse game queries. Training GameGoCoder on GameGoData yields a model that outperforms matched baselines and is comparable to frontier models across gamedev benchmarks. All code, datasets, and models will be made publicly available.

Artificial intelligence has advanced individual radiotherapy tasks, yet these capabilities remain separated across clinical stages, software environments and data modalities. This fragmentation contrasts with the longitudinal radiotherapy workflow from treatment decision-making through follow-up. Here we present RadOnc-Agent, an agentic artificial-intelligence framework that formalizes radiotherapy into four clinical phases and provides 26 callable functions through a conversational interface. A large-language-model controller maps clinical intent to schema-constrained calls, preserves patient and workflow context, and routes requests to specialist services. We evaluated system execution using 2,600 single-function requests (7,800 repeat executions), 200 prespecified synthetic cross-stage scenarios spanning four phases (600 executions), and 120 workflow instances from 60 de-identified patient records (360 clean executions) representing decision-to-planning and planning-to-adaptation. RadOnc-Agent selected the intended function in 98.79% of single-function executions, completed 96.50% of scripted cross-stage workflows, and completed 96.67% of real-patient workflow executions. In comparative ablations, removing longitudinal state reduced cross-stage completion from 96.50% to 84.00%, while disabling schema and identity validation increased mismatched backend dispatch from 0% to 95.28% in a replay/test evaluation. These findings establish the technical feasibility of an LLM-orchestrated architecture for coordinating heterogeneous radiotherapy capabilities and information across longitudinal workflows; they do not establish clinical correctness, clinical utility or prospective benefit.

Autonomous coding agents solve repository issues by reading code, running commands, editing files, and submitting patches. Extra inference-time compute yields gains only when it produces a useful repair and supplies reliable evidence for choosing one. Three behaviors decide both, and we argue they are teachable rather than byproducts of scale, so a policy can carry them instead of a scaffold. Location diversity remains narrow, since attempts return to the same site and extra samples add no coverage. Edit diversity is left unexploited, since methodologies that differ resolve complementary issues no single run reaches. Verification misleads, since a test the agent writes for its own patch accepts many incorrect ones. Directing search by execution feedback and scoring each patch against its own reverted tree resolves 52.8% of SWE-bench Verified using 48.1% of the agent-steps an eight-sample baseline spends. Training moves these behaviors into the policy. On the 270 issues held out from SFT and RL training, weighted supervised fine-tuning raises pass@1 from 31.9% to 35.2% and pass@8 from 46.7% to 51.1%. A reinforcement objective then trains the verifier against gold-labeled repairs and incorrect variants, crediting the assertions that detect them. It raises pass@1 to 43.0% and pass@8 to 60.7%, lifts verifier precision from 26.8% to 41.7%, and more than halves false acceptance. Resolution improves on two of three out-of-distribution suites and verifier precision on all three, and the gains hold at 7B, 14B, and 30B against published coder baselines.

AI agents can take actions. At times, those actions can go beyond what is intended. Agent reliability can be defined as assurance that an agent will stay within intended bounds and operate within limits. Today, there is no shared framework or language for describing, validating, and benchmarking the reliability of agentic deployments in financial services. This makes it difficult for financial institutions, vendors, and regulators to assess and trust agents at scale, thus limiting the pace of development and adoption. A standardized, shared representation of agent reliability would fill the gap. This paper introduces the Agent Reliability Profile, a per-agent unit of assurance evidence for agent deployments in financial services. Each Profile records a bounded, falsifiable claim, this agentic system reliably functions within its operating boundary. We define "operating boundary" as an agent having; (1) a defined autonomy tier, (2) a defined operational design domain, (3) defined classes of action, and (4) a defined control envelope. Production assurance progresses through three levels while the Profile schema remains constant: a Profile Builder compiles a Level 1 Asserted Profile from institutional evidence, a Profile Validator tests the deployment in its own environment to produce a Level 2 Validated Profile, and operation of the same tests by a qualified independent assessor produces a Level 3 Verified Profile. Separately a Benchmarked Profile reports results comparable across institutions under reference conditions. We describe the architecture, the artifact, the assurance ladder, the comparability flag, associated tools, an evaluation methodology, applications for financial institutions and supervisors, limitations, and a staged implementation program.

Executable Agent Skills combine natural-language instructions and scripts into reusable packages for LLM agents, and revising them requires fixing errors without breaking correct behavior. Existing benchmarks do not systematically distinguish documentation repair, script repair, and preservation when evaluating skill self-evolution. We introduce SkillScriptBench, a 350-task benchmark designed to evaluate these capabilities separately. From a survey of over 35,000 GitHub-hosted Skill roots, we select 100 packages and construct 150 repair tasks. Each task pairs a package containing injected script faults with a maintenance request and executable checks of the required behavior. A complementary controlled track contains 200 tasks from 50 packages, each evaluated under the same maintenance request in four states: clean, documentation faults, script faults, and faults in both. Across four LLMs, methods that edit both documentation and scripts can repair script faults but do not consistently outperform Markdown-only revision on documentation repair or preservation. We therefore introduce AST-Guided Skill Revision, which uses abstract syntax trees and calling relationships to link maintenance requirements to relevant code locations. It restricts script edits to these locations and updates the documentation to match the revised scripts. Averaged across models, this revision stage yields absolute gains in repair success of 21.9% for Raw Package and 27.7% for CoEvoSkills on faulty packages. Absolute gains in the proportion of tasks solved in all three runs reach 20.8% and 31.5%, respectively, indicating more consistent repair success across repeated runs.

Autonomous agents built on Large Language Models (LLMs) need standardized protocols to interoperate across systems. Several now exist (A2A, MCP, ACP, ANP, NLIP), but the Natural Language Interaction Protocol (NLIP) has not appeared in any controlled performance study, and no work has measured where an agent protocol's latency is spent. We compare NLIP and the Agent-to-Agent (A2A) protocol empirically, decomposing latency into message creation, connection, and send phases across three independent hardware environments. For lightweight coordination, NLIP is 8.4-9.6x faster than the baseline A2A SDK implementation on two environments and about 4x on a third; the direction of the advantage is consistent, its magnitude depends on the hardware. The advantage is stage-specific: for the end-to-end pipeline, where LLM inference dominates, the protocols are near parity. The difference comes almost entirely from connection setup. To test A2A at its best, we also ran A2A SDK with connection caching enabled; caching narrows its gap with NLIP by a hardware-dependent amount, from 2.75x on one machine to near-parity on faster hardware, where at scale a cache-optimized A2A-SDK matches NLIP. We report these as measured conditions without a single causal account of the residual send-phase cost. Against the more optimized Python-A2A, NLIP leads by about 4x on the same stage. We close with a protocol-selection guide keyed to workload characteristics.

Building LLMs that behave well socially, not merely correctly, requires Building LLMs that behave well socially, not merely correctly, requires more than producing locally helpful responses. A socially competent agent must infer users' unstated goals, respect their preferences, and adapt as the conversation unfolds. These behaviors are inherently multi-turn and social, making them hard to optimize: real interaction data is scarce, and user preferences are typically latent rather than directly observable. To address these challenges, we build on a persona-driven social simulation environment (consisting of a persona library, LLM-based user simulators, and a user-satisfaction scoring system ranging from [0, 1]), to introduce preference-batched GRPO (PB-GRPO), a post-training algorithm that learns socially adaptive policies from conversation-level feedback. Compared to vanilla GRPO, PB-GRPO computes advantages using a normalization estimated across a bucket of users with similar preferences, stabilizing training across a diverse social population. Empirical evidence shows that PB-GRPO improves models' social behavior over strong reinforcement learning baselines in our simulated environment.