跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail
← 研踪 PaperTrail

arXiv:2611.05827 · v1

TandemBench: Benchmarking Decision Models for Multi-Agent Collaboration

首次提交 2026-11-04 10:08
版本更新 2026-11-04 10:08
雷达观测 2026-11-05 10:08
arXiv ↗PDF ↗

摘要

Decision models choose among predefined options in tasks such as routing and action selection. In multi-agent collaboration, a decision determines how members divide work, exchange resources, and act in parallel. We introduce TandemBench, a benchmark of 1,200 questions in multi-agent cooking scenarios where coordination choices affect goal completion. Models receive complete global information and candidate team plans, with reference answers established through execution and exact search. Models select an optimal team plan and, in paired variants that retain or remove it, judge whether better arrangements exist beyond the supplied options. We evaluate 40 native decision models and compare them with 10 general-purpose language models. The best native decision model achieves 62.50% decision accuracy. Native decision models remain close to chance in optimality verification. Paired tests reveal that some report better alternatives regardless of whether an optimal plan is already present. These findings show that team-plan decision accuracy alone can conceal systematic errors in judging whether the supplied options contain an optimal arrangement. The dataset and evaluation code are publicly available at https://github.com/lililibaohang/TandemBench.

AI 论文解读

基于摘要 · 非全文审阅

此版本尚未生成 AI 解读。解读由后台任务生成并按论文版本保存,登录后共享已有结果。

版本差异

目前只观测到一个版本,无法比较变化。之后收录新版本时,会在这里对照标题、作者、分类和摘要。

观测到的版本

相邻记录可能跳过中间版本;首次发现 v2 及以上也会标为版本更新。

v1 · 2026-11-04 10:08 · 最新观测版本

TandemBench: Benchmarking Decision Models for Multi-Agent Collaboration

Decision models choose among predefined options in tasks such as routing and action selection. In multi-agent collaboration, a decision determines how members divide work, exchange resources, and act in parallel. We introduce TandemBench, a benchmark of 1,200 questions in multi-agent cooking scenarios where coordination choices affect goal completion. Models receive complete global information and candidate team plans, with reference answers established through execution and exact search. Models select an optimal team plan and, in paired variants that retain or remove it, judge whether better arrangements exist beyond the supplied options. We evaluate 40 native decision models and compare them with 10 general-purpose language models. The best native decision model achieves 62.50% decision accuracy. Native decision models remain close to chance in optimality verification. Paired tests reveal that some report better alternatives regardless of whether an optimal plan is already present. These findings show that team-plan decision accuracy alone can conceal systematic errors in judging whether the supplied options contain an optimal arrangement. The dataset and evaluation code are publicly available at https://github.com/lililibaohang/TandemBench.

查看此版本解读 →查看此版本原文 ↗