CodeClash: Benchmarking Goal-Oriented Software Engineering
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Current benchmarks for coding evaluate language models (LMs) on concrete, well-specified tasks such as fixing specific bugs or writing targeted tests. However, human programmers do not spend all day incessantly addressing isolated tasks. Instead, real-world software development is grounded in the pursuit of high-level goals, like improving user retention or reducing costs. Evaluating whether LMs can also iteratively develop code to better accomplish open-ended objectives without any explicit guidance remains an open challenge. To address this, we introduce CodeClash, a benchmark where LMs compete in multi-round tournaments to build the best codebase for achieving a competitive objective. Each round proceeds in two phases: agents edit their code, then their codebases compete head-to-head in a code arena that determines winners based on objectives like score maximization, resource acquisition, or survival. Whether it's writing notes, scrutinizing documentation, analyzing competition logs, or creating test suites, models must decide for themselves how to improve their codebases both absolutely and against their opponents. We run 1680 tournaments (25,200 rounds total) to evaluate 8 LMs across 6 arenas. Our results reveal that while models exhibit diverse development styles, they share fundamental limitations in strategic reasoning. Models also struggle with long-term codebase maintenance, as repositories become progressively messy and redundant. These limitations are stark: top models lose every round against expert human programmers. We open-source CodeClash to advance the study of autonomous, goal-oriented code development.
Key facts. Cited by 9 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 2 Nov 2025.
Builds on
0 of 0 references.
No references here yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 1; 2026: 8.
9 papers.
- 2025Toward Training Superintelligent Software Agents through Self-Play SWE-RLcited by 37
- 2026ContextBench: A Benchmark for Context Retrieval in Coding Agentscited by 23
- 2026CoffeeBench: Benchmarking Long-Horizon LLM Agents in Heterogeneous Multi-Agent Economiescited by 7
- 2026Claw-SWE-Bench: A Benchmark for Evaluating OpenClaw-style Agent Harnesses on Coding Taskscited by 6
- 2026SorryDB: Can AI Provers Complete Real-World Lean Theorems?cited by 4
- 2026Post-training is (Massive) Supervised Learningcited by 0
- 2026Ask-E: An Environment for Calibrated Question Generationcited by 0
- 2026Compiled Agency: Frontier General-Purpose Coding Agents Build Winning Game Players from Bare Interaction - from Flappy Bird to StarCraft II and Civilizationcited by 0
- 2026Can AI Agents Learn Their Way to the Top? Evaluating Heuristic Learning in a Long-Running Game Agent Competitioncited by 0
- 2026Can AI Agents Learn Their Way to the Top? Evaluating Heuristic Learning in a Long-Running Game Agent Competition8 Oct 2026
- 2026Ask-E: An Environment for Calibrated Question Generation7 Aug 2026
- 2026Compiled Agency: Frontier General-Purpose Coding Agents Build Winning Game Players from Bare Interaction - from Flappy Bird to StarCraft II and Civilization17 Jul 2026
- 2026CoffeeBench: Benchmarking Long-Horizon LLM Agents in Heterogeneous Multi-Agent Economies15 Jun 2026
- 2026Claw-SWE-Bench: A Benchmark for Evaluating OpenClaw-style Agent Harnesses on Coding Tasks10 Jun 2026
- 2026Post-training is (Massive) Supervised Learning20 Apr 2026
- 2026SorryDB: Can AI Provers Complete Real-World Lean Theorems?3 Mar 2026
- 2026ContextBench: A Benchmark for Context Retrieval in Coding Agents5 Feb 2026
- 2025Toward Training Superintelligent Software Agents through Self-Play SWE-RL21 Dec 2025