analiza aiqbench
OrchestraBench establishes critical benchmarks for multi-agent systems by diagnosing failure modes, recovery mechanisms, and decomposition quality rather than just reporting task accuracy. The study reveals significant vulnerabilities in keyword-based routing policies against adversarial inputs while demonstrating that trusted-state signals are often the primary driver of apparent containment gains over autonomous detection. This research provides essential metrics like cascade radius to guide engineers building robust enterprise-grade agent pipelines where fault isolation is paramount.
OrchestraBench: Evaluating Multi-Agent Orchestration Failure Modes, Recovery, and Decomposition Quality
arXiv:2608.05263v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Multi-agent orchestration frameworks are moving from demos to production, yet benchmarks typically report task accuracy without diagnosing why a pipeline failed, where a cascade began, or which routing decision caused the breakdown. OrchestraBench evaluates failure, recovery, and decomposition through a controlled, seed-reproducible failure-injection harness over templated enterprise workflows. It introduces cascade radius and per-failure-mode recovery as primary metrics and compares routing policies with bootstrap confidence intervals and paired tests. On a 26-case gold-labelled diagnostic, a keyword/flag router scored 0% on adversarial cases with misleading or missing surface flags, whereas an intent-reasoning model router scored 100%, matching the oracle. Controlled mechanism probes with a real Claude agent over a verifiable arithmetic dependency chain revealed three failure-handling tiers across five MAST modes: tool faults recovered fully (1.0), ambiguous delegation recovered partially (0.30), and three latent or semantic modes never recovered (0.0). This ordering persisted when the computation was reframed as a loan-approval workflow and across Sonnet, Opus, and Haiku, although absolute rates shifted with context. Blind retry reproduced latent faults and increased time to detection, indicating that detection and attribution are necessary for containment. Cascade radius increased with pipeline depth (mean 0.9 to 4.7 across depths 3-7). A trusted-state repair ablation showed that apparent containment gains primarily came from the trusted-state signal rather than autonomous detection. These results are controlled-chain mechanism probes, not domain-workload claims.
Abstract:Multi-agent orchestration frameworks are moving from demos to production, yet benchmarks typically report task accuracy without diagnosing why a pipeline failed, where a cascade began, or which routing decision caused the breakdown. OrchestraBench evaluates failure, recovery, and decomposition through a controlled, seed-reproducible failure-injection harness over templated enterprise workflows. It introduces cascade radius and per-failure-mode recovery as primary metrics and compares routing policies with bootstrap confidence intervals and paired tests. On a 26-case gold-labelled diagnostic, a keyword/flag router scored 0% on adversarial cases with misleading or missing surface flags, whereas an intent-reasoning model router scored 100%, matching the oracle. Controlled mechanism probes with a real Claude agent over a verifiable arithmetic dependency chain revealed three failure-handling tiers across five MAST modes: tool faults recovered fully (1.0), ambiguous delegation recovered partially (0.30), and three latent or semantic modes never recovered (0.0). This ordering persisted when the computation was reframed as a loan-approval workflow and across Sonnet, Opus, and Haiku, although absolute rates shifted with context. Blind retry reproduced latent faults and increased time to detection, indicating that detection and attribution are necessary for containment. Cascade radius increased with pipeline depth (mean 0.9 to 4.7 across depths 3-7). A trusted-state repair ablation showed that apparent containment gains primarily came from the trusted-state signal rather than autonomous detection. These results are controlled-chain mechanism probes, not domain-workload claims.
Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)
arXiv:2608.05263 [cs.AI]
(or arXiv:2608.05263v1 [cs.AI] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2608.05263 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 · 317 cuvinte
Subiecte conexe

Build a Physical AI model factory with NVIDIA Cosmos 3 on SageMaker HyperPod
AWS · 4 sept. 2026

Run agent-driven Amazon SageMaker HyperPod operations with InstantStart
AWS · 4 sept. 2026
[AINews] AI Engineer NYC: Gemini 4 Argon, Vals AI Benchmarks
Latent Space · 14 oct. 2026

LiveLaw Supreme Court Half-Yearly Digest: January - June 2026 [Part 2]
livelaw.in · 13 sept. 2026