Skip to content
aiqbench takeAI Research

aiqbench analysis

Composing insight from the full article — this may take a moment.

Source coveringarXiv
What this isA model's reading of the article and related coverage, written for aiqbench. Not the publisher's words.

StebBench: Diagnosing Real-World Procedural Understanding in AI Agents

arXiv1 min read

arXiv:2610.26679v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Evaluating an agent's planning ability remains challenging for open-domain tasks, where verifying procedures through execution is often impractical. Existing evaluations typically assess only the final plan and do not distinguish procedural errors such as missing, incorrect, or misordered actions. We introduce STEPBENCH, a benchmark of 6,885 verified procedures crawled from wikiHow across 81 open-domain categories. From each procedure, we derive 5 diagnostic tasks: four with deterministic answers involving withheld, incorrect, or shuffled steps, and one requiring next-step generation. We additionally evaluate full-plan generation to examine how diagnostic performance correlates with end-to-end plan validity. Using the same procedures across tasks lets us directly compare different planning capabilities. For generation, STEPEVAL identifies critical failures that prevent goal completion. Across 14 configurations of 12 models, we find substantial differences across planning capabilities, with step ordering proving the most difficult: the strongest model correctly orders only 63.0% of procedures, dropping to 33.1% for those with nine or more steps. Incorrect-step detection also predicts judged plan validity across models, suggesting a lower-cost alternative for evaluating generation quality. On STEPBENCH-Val, comprising 214 procedures published in 2026, comprehension scores and rankings remain stable, suggesting limited influence from memorisation.

Read the full article at arXiv

Related coverage