analiza aiqbench
This survey establishes a standardized framework for evaluating AI agents by defining five core dimensions of agentic behavior, addressing critical gaps in reproducibility and comparison within the field. By introducing the Agent Compendium, it offers researchers a unified resource to benchmark capabilities across diverse systems, moving beyond ambiguous terminology toward systematic study.
Defining AI Agents: A Compendium of Criteria, Metrics, and Benchmarks
arXiv:2609.11018v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: The term agent in artificial intelligence lacks a standard definition, complicating the evaluation, comparison, and reproducibility of AI agent research. We address this ambiguity through a survey organized around five dimensions of agenticness: environmental interaction, learning and adaptation, autonomy, goal-directed behavior, and temporal coherence. For each dimension, we examine how the underlying capability has been conceptualized across prior work and synthesize the metrics, benchmarks, and evaluation frameworks used to assess it. This review provides a structured account of the current landscape of agent evaluation, highlighting both established approaches and areas where evaluation remains limited or inconsistent. We additionally introduce the Agent Compendium, a public-facing digital resource that organizes and extends the evaluation methods identified through this review. Together, the survey and compendium provide a common structure for evaluating and comparing agent capabilities across AI systems, supporting more reproducible research, clearer communication, and more systematic study of artificial agents.
Abstract:The term agent in artificial intelligence lacks a standard definition, complicating the evaluation, comparison, and reproducibility of AI agent research. We address this ambiguity through a survey organized around five dimensions of agenticness: environmental interaction, learning and adaptation, autonomy, goal-directed behavior, and temporal coherence. For each dimension, we examine how the underlying capability has been conceptualized across prior work and synthesize the metrics, benchmarks, and evaluation frameworks used to assess it. This review provides a structured account of the current landscape of agent evaluation, highlighting both established approaches and areas where evaluation remains limited or inconsistent. We additionally introduce the Agent Compendium, a public-facing digital resource that organizes and extends the evaluation methods identified through this review. Together, the survey and compendium provide a common structure for evaluating and comparing agent capabilities across AI systems, supporting more reproducible research, clearer communication, and more systematic study of artificial agents.
Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Multiagent Systems (cs.MA)
arXiv:2609.11018 [cs.AI]
(or arXiv:2609.11018v1 [cs.AI] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.11018 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.
Text integral sub licența deschisă a publicației · 245 cuvinte
Subiecte conexe

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

Operationalizing Genie Ontology in Your Data Stack
Databricks · 1 sept. 2026

Amazon Research Awards recipients announced
Amazon Science · 27 mai 2026

Promptimus: Improving already good LLM prompts with zero manual engineering
Amazon Science · 14 mai 2026