Skip to content
aiqbench takeMachine Learning

aiqbench analysis

This research proposes an industrial pipeline for curating regression evaluation sets within agent-extensibility platforms by projecting queries onto a platform-owned capability taxonomy. The method utilizes hybrid deterministic and LLM-based classifiers to identify minimal query subsets that maximize coverage of distinct capability signatures, addressing the constraint of limited release cadence in benchmark maintenance. This approach is significant for AI infrastructure teams managing declarative agents with custom actions who need scalable methods to maintain robust regression suites without inflating query counts.
Source coveringarXiv
What this isA model's reading of the article and related coverage, written for aiqbench. Not the publisher's words.

Who Belongs in the Eval Set? A Capability-Taxonomy-Driven Pipeline for Curating Regression Eval Sets in Agent-Extensibility Platforms

arXiv3 min read

arXiv:2608.01004v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Platform teams hosting agent-extensibility surfaces face a regression-economics paradox: every onboarding customer ships an evaluation set tuned to their domain, but the platform's regression set must live under a hard query-count ceiling bounded by release cadence. To our knowledge, no published industrial pipeline addresses this platform-side curation problem: existing evaluation frameworks are customer-side, and benchmark-compression work treats benchmarks as fixed pools rather than streams of incoming sets. We describe a capability-taxonomy-driven curation pipeline applied to declarative agents with custom actions in Microsoft 365 Copilot. It takes an agent specification and a customer's eval set as input, projects each query into a platform-owned capability taxonomy, and outputs per-query decisions (admit, drop, swap, or human review), under the philosophy that a healthy regression set is the minimal set of queries capturing the maximal spread of capability signatures -- distinct combinations of capabilities a query exercises together. Three components instantiate this: a classifier producing per-(query, capability) verdicts via a hybrid of deterministic specification-based extraction and large-language-model (LLM) semantic inference; an Invocation Quality (IQ) rater scoring how thoroughly a query exercises each capability, so a new query sharing a signature with an existing entry can still be recognized as a better test and displace it; and a consolidator comparing incoming queries against the regression set on coverage and quality through a rule-based decision cascade, backed by a conservative curator that only suggests evictions. The mechanism is taxonomy-agnostic and applies to any regression eval-set curation problem with a typed capability taxonomy, including taxonomies that evolve in response to the very evidence the pipeline surfaces.

Title:Who Belongs in the Eval Set? A Capability-Taxonomy-Driven Pipeline for Curating Regression Eval Sets in Agent-Extensibility Platforms

Abstract:Platform teams hosting agent-extensibility surfaces face a regression-economics paradox: every onboarding customer ships an evaluation set tuned to their domain, but the platform's regression set must live under a hard query-count ceiling bounded by release cadence. To our knowledge, no published industrial pipeline addresses this platform-side curation problem: existing evaluation frameworks are customer-side, and benchmark-compression work treats benchmarks as fixed pools rather than streams of incoming sets. We describe a capability-taxonomy-driven curation pipeline applied to declarative agents with custom actions in Microsoft 365 Copilot. It takes an agent specification and a customer's eval set as input, projects each query into a platform-owned capability taxonomy, and outputs per-query decisions (admit, drop, swap, or human review), under the philosophy that a healthy regression set is the minimal set of queries capturing the maximal spread of capability signatures -- distinct combinations of capabilities a query exercises together. Three components instantiate this: a classifier producing per-(query, capability) verdicts via a hybrid of deterministic specification-based extraction and large-language-model (LLM) semantic inference; an Invocation Quality (IQ) rater scoring how thoroughly a query exercises each capability, so a new query sharing a signature with an existing entry can still be recognized as a better test and displace it; and a consolidator comparing incoming queries against the regression set on coverage and quality through a rule-based decision cascade, backed by a conservative curator that only suggests evictions. The mechanism is taxonomy-agnostic and applies to any regression eval-set curation problem with a typed capability taxonomy, including taxonomies that evolve in response to the very evidence the pipeline surfaces.

Machine Learning (cs.LG); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Software Engineering (cs.SE)

D.2.5; I.2.6; I.2.11

arXiv:2608.01004 [cs.LG]

(or arXiv:2608.01004v1 [cs.LG] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2608.01004 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 · 379 words

Related coverage