跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail

YOUR RESEARCH, IN SIGHT

让下一篇重要论文,不再错过。

覆盖计算机全学科,以 AI 为快捷入口。关注方向、作者和关键词,把发现变成持续的研究积累。

部分采集异常
正在读取账号与研究记录…

全站更新概况

+2471新增论文
+2025其中 AI 相关
+163已有论文修订
+100新增 AI 导读

arXiv 最近完成扫描:2026-11-11 04:56 · 全站最近入库:2026-11-10 15:22各信源进度 →

统计口径与数据新鲜度

统计 2026-11-10 05:03 — 2026-11-11 05:03(北京时间) · 点击数字查看对应简报;AI 相关包含在新增论文内。

最近完成检查:2026-11-11 04:56最近发现新增版本:2026-11-10 15:22库内论文最新更新时间:2026-11-10 02:59

每分钟刷新已保存的数据。空检查不代表采集异常;新收录可能包含历史论文。AI 导读按新增版本计数。

20,643 已收录论文17,531 AI 相关5,643 有修订112 HF 社区发现

浏览论文库

时间范围跟随排序:版本更新、本站收录或首次发表。最新收录可能包含历史论文。部分信源异常,查看状态 →

找到 1 篇论文 · 按版本更新时间排序上轮扫描起点 2026-11-11 04:55(北京时间)
新论文 · v1arXiv:2611.12393

AutoBuddy: Evaluating Proactive, Always-On Agents on Task Discovery and Execution in a Simulated Workplace

Shiqi Chen, Daniel Madrigal Diaz, Wei-Ning Chen, Gbola Afonja, Fangkai Yang, Rujia Wang, Chetan Bansal, Victor Rühle 等 10 位作者

原文摘要

As LLM agents become more autonomous, they are increasingly expected to run as always-on assistants on a user's behalf, identifying work to be done and completing it without being asked. Yet existing benchmarks usually give the agent its task, whereas in knowledge work the requests sit in the user's workspace and the agent must first recognise which obligations exist. We study proactive task discovery and execution, in which an agent must infer a user's pending tasks from their workspace and complete them in the systems where the work lives. This setting poses two challenges. For the agent, the tasks are buried in a large volume of mail, chat, documents and records. For evaluation, a benchmark needs a simulated organisation whose people, events and documents are mutually consistent, so that tasks arise realistically and their correct outcomes are known. We introduce AutoBuddy-Bench, a simulator that addresses these challenges. It models an organisation's employees, projects, business systems and event history as a temporal graph, renders it into realistic workspace artefacts, derives ground-truth tasks from the events that create obligations, and computes each task's outcome from the world state; execution is judged by the agent's changes to the workspace. To evaluate current LLMs, we build AutoBuddy, a reference agent with interchangeable backbone LLMs: it identifies tasks from the workspace, grounding each in its source records, and executes each in a separate session with write access. Varying only the backbone, we find a systematic shift in where tasks are lost: weaker models fail mainly at discovery, intermediate models identify tasks but often stop short of carrying them out, and the strongest models fail mainly during execution, most often on business-system operations. Discovery precision is only weakly related to execution quality, suggesting the two are distinct capabilities.

cs.AI · cs.LG