analiza aiqbench
This arXiv paper presents AlphaDiana, a measurement framework for evaluating AI agents built from reasoning models, tool use, skills, and memory. Its key finding is that harness and component changes (tools, skill guidance, retained history) do not reliably improve accuracy, and token-efficiency metrics can mislead unless they are read alongside correctness. For practitioners, the takeaway is that agent gains should be validated per question and per condition rather than assumed from architectural additions.
AlphaDiana: A Measurement System for Agents in Verifiable Reasoning Tasks
arXiv:2610.20675v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Agents pair reasoning models with harnesses that organize model calls, execute tools, load skill instructions, and retain history in memory. Understanding agent performance requires linking execution conditions to outcomes, behavior, and resource use. We introduce AlphaDiana, a measurement system with modular interfaces for datasets, agents, environments, and scorers. It preserves harness-native control loops while controlling file reuse and memory retention separately. AlphaDiana supports macro analyses of complete agents and micro interventions on agent components such as tools, skills, and memory under matched conditions. We study three open-source models and three open-source harnesses on five answer-based benchmarks, with two models also tested on two interactive benchmarks. We find that harnesses do not consistently improve the accuracy of reasoning: gains on questions unsolved by the model alone can be outweighed by losses on questions it answers correctly without tools. This inconsistency extends to component interventions: neither skill guidance nor retained history reliably improves accuracy. Behavior and output-token use must be assessed with correctness: low token entropy can accompany wrong answers, and less output per execution can mean more output tokens per correct answer when accuracy falls. AlphaDiana links answer correctness and execution status to traces and resource records for comparing agents and diagnosing failures under shared task and resource policies.
Abstract:Agents pair reasoning models with harnesses that organize model calls, execute tools, load skill instructions, and retain history in memory. Understanding agent performance requires linking execution conditions to outcomes, behavior, and resource use. We introduce AlphaDiana, a measurement system with modular interfaces for datasets, agents, environments, and scorers. It preserves harness-native control loops while controlling file reuse and memory retention separately. AlphaDiana supports macro analyses of complete agents and micro interventions on agent components such as tools, skills, and memory under matched conditions. We study three open-source models and three open-source harnesses on five answer-based benchmarks, with two models also tested on two interactive benchmarks. We find that harnesses do not consistently improve the accuracy of reasoning: gains on questions unsolved by the model alone can be outweighed by losses on questions it answers correctly without tools. This inconsistency extends to component interventions: neither skill guidance nor retained history reliably improves accuracy. Behavior and output-token use must be assessed with correctness: low token entropy can accompany wrong answers, and less output per execution can mean more output tokens per correct answer when accuracy falls. AlphaDiana links answer correctness and execution status to traces and resource records for comparing agents and diagnosing failures under shared task and resource policies.
Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Machine Learning (cs.LG)
arXiv:2610.20675 [cs.AI]
(or arXiv:2610.20675v1 [cs.AI] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.20675 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite
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.
Text integral sub licența deschisă a publicației · 303 cuvinte
Subiecte conexe

Why do models task game?
AI Alignment Forum · 6 aug. 2026

[AINews] not much happened today
Latent Space · 3 oct. 2026

Concrete Evaluations to Investigate the OpenAI Model That Hacked Hugging Face
AI Alignment Forum · 3 aug. 2026

Expenditure Horizon: Measuring Optimization Ability, with an Application to NanoGPT
METR · 21 iul. 2026