analiza aiqbench
This paper establishes a source-aware taxonomy for diagnosing failures in agentic workflows, distinguishing between model-level issues like reasoning errors and systemic problems rooted in execution infrastructure and tool integration. By analyzing both academic literature and real-world GitHub data, the study reveals that while theoretical research focuses on planning and perception, practical deployments struggle most with iterative actuation and API reliability. Consequently, improving agent robustness requires treating workflow stability as a comprehensive systems engineering challenge rather than solely optimizing large language model outputs.
Why Agentic Workflows Fail: A Taxonomy Derived from Literature and Empirical Data
arXiv:2610.17418v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Agentic workflows combine large language models with planning, memory, tools, execution environments, and iterative feedback. Their failures are difficult to diagnose because the same user-visible symptom may originate from model behavior, workflow orchestration, external tools, infrastructure, or their interaction. This paper presents a source-aware taxonomy of agentic workflow failures and applies it to evidence from academic literature and GitHub. The taxonomy combines source attribution with three empirical dimensions: a concrete failure-type dictionary, workflow-stage localization, and agent-capability localization. Its central structure is a two-axis localization matrix: workflow stages form the horizontal process axis and agent capabilities form the vertical functional axis. This design moves beyond taxonomies that mainly classify final failure manifestations by localizing intermediate process states inside agent operation. Our empirical comparison shows that literature-derived failures emphasize planning, reasoning, learning, perception, and knowledge-related mechanisms, whereas GitHub-derived failures concentrate on execution-stage, actuation-related, tool, API, and infrastructure failures. The dominant hotspot is iterative execution and actuation. These findings indicate that agentic workflow reliability should be treated as a systems problem rather than only a model-output problem. The taxonomy provides a basis for structured evaluation, root cause analysis, failure injection, and engineering triage.
Abstract:Agentic workflows combine large language models with planning, memory, tools, execution environments, and iterative feedback. Their failures are difficult to diagnose because the same user-visible symptom may originate from model behavior, workflow orchestration, external tools, infrastructure, or their interaction. This paper presents a source-aware taxonomy of agentic workflow failures and applies it to evidence from academic literature and GitHub. The taxonomy combines source attribution with three empirical dimensions: a concrete failure-type dictionary, workflow-stage localization, and agent-capability localization. Its central structure is a two-axis localization matrix: workflow stages form the horizontal process axis and agent capabilities form the vertical functional axis. This design moves beyond taxonomies that mainly classify final failure manifestations by localizing intermediate process states inside agent operation. Our empirical comparison shows that literature-derived failures emphasize planning, reasoning, learning, perception, and knowledge-related mechanisms, whereas GitHub-derived failures concentrate on execution-stage, actuation-related, tool, API, and infrastructure failures. The dominant hotspot is iterative execution and actuation. These findings indicate that agentic workflow reliability should be treated as a systems problem rather than only a model-output problem. The taxonomy provides a basis for structured evaluation, root cause analysis, failure injection, and engineering triage.
Software Engineering (cs.SE); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)
arXiv:2610.17418 [cs.SE]
(or arXiv:2610.17418v1 [cs.SE] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.17418 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 · 287 cuvinte
Subiecte conexe

Research Note: Filtering Subversion-Relevant Information From Pretraining Data Is Feasible
LessWrong · 5 oct. 2026

[AINews] not much happened today
Latent Space · 18 sept. 2026
Synthesis Superintelligence: from Semiconductors to Superconductors — Periodic Labs’ Liam Fedus and Ekin Dogus Cubuk
Latent Space · 8 oct. 2026

From Foundational Competency to Expert Performance: A Curriculum Approach to Model Development
Snorkel AI Blog · 15 sept. 2026