aiqbench analysis
This research dissects the performance gap between real-time AI agents and zero-latency teachers by isolating latency-induced delays from inherent decision quality degradation. The findings demonstrate that while network latency contributes significantly to accuracy drops in asynchronous environments, optimizing training via DAgger can recover substantial portions of lost performance without sacrificing speed. For developers building low-latency systems, this distinction is critical for diagnosing whether performance bottlenecks stem from hardware timing issues or fundamental model limitations.
Separating Decision Time from Decision Quality in the Real-Time Gap of Distilled Deciders: Evidence from a Game and a Conveyor Simulator
arXiv:2610.04810v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Real-time agents are often evaluated with the world paused, or with decision time rounded to whole ticks (tick conversion). Tick conversion predicts almost no loss for a learned decider whose hit accuracy falls by 14.8 percentage points (pp) on the same games in asynchronous play. We instead split the decider's gap to a zero-latency teacher into time and quality components. In ViZDoom, we train a small decider by imitating a scripted teacher, run the game on wall-clock time, and add a control in which the teacher waits for a call to the decider's server before deciding. On a Windows host, three preregistered studies put the time component at 6.5-8.7 pp and the quality component at 6.3-8.6 pp. On a Linux host that skips 0.08-0.09% of ticks, the time component disappeared (-0.1 pp; paired 95% bootstrap interval [-0.4, 0.0]) while the quality component remained (5.6 pp [3.7, 7.5]). Retraining on teacher-labelled states from the decider's own play (DAgger) improved it on new games on both hosts (2.6 pp [0.4, 4.9] and 3.1 pp [1.1, 5.2]), a preregistered partial success. Imposing one delay schedule on every arm in live play left a quality component of 5.8 pp [4.0, 7.5] on 100 new games, and retraining cut the decider's disagreement with the teacher on its own states from 22.7% to 14.9%. In a conveyor simulator with a 400 ms deadline, delay past it erased the quality component. A latency-matched control whose delays match the decider's shows which remedy to try.
Abstract:Real-time agents are often evaluated with the world paused, or with decision time rounded to whole ticks (tick conversion). Tick conversion predicts almost no loss for a learned decider whose hit accuracy falls by 14.8 percentage points (pp) on the same games in asynchronous play. We instead split the decider's gap to a zero-latency teacher into time and quality components. In ViZDoom, we train a small decider by imitating a scripted teacher, run the game on wall-clock time, and add a control in which the teacher waits for a call to the decider's server before deciding. On a Windows host, three preregistered studies put the time component at 6.5-8.7 pp and the quality component at 6.3-8.6 pp. On a Linux host that skips 0.08-0.09% of ticks, the time component disappeared (-0.1 pp; paired 95% bootstrap interval [-0.4, 0.0]) while the quality component remained (5.6 pp [3.7, 7.5]). Retraining on teacher-labelled states from the decider's own play (DAgger) improved it on new games on both hosts (2.6 pp [0.4, 4.9] and 3.1 pp [1.1, 5.2]), a preregistered partial success. Imposing one delay schedule on every arm in live play left a quality component of 5.8 pp [4.0, 7.5] on 100 new games, and retraining cut the decider's disagreement with the teacher on its own states from 22.7% to 14.9%. In a conveyor simulator with a 400 ms deadline, delay past it erased the quality component. A latency-matched control whose delays match the decider's shows which remedy to try.
80 pages including supplementary material. Submitted to Knowledge-Based Systems
Machine Learning (cs.LG); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)
arXiv:2610.04810 [cs.LG]
(or arXiv:2610.04810v1 [cs.LG] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.04810 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Full text under the publisher's open licence · 353 words
Related coverage

Vertical Advantage: Transforming Industries with Lakebase and Agentic AI
Databricks · Aug 27, 2026
State of the Field: AI for Epistemics and Coordination
LessWrong · Oct 2, 2026

[AINews] Meta Muse Wonder & Wonder Full: MSL’s Claude 5.5-tier Frontier Model
Latent Space · Oct 13, 2026
[AINews] AI Engineer NYC: Gemini 4 Argon, Vals AI Benchmarks
Latent Space · Oct 14, 2026