From Static Benchmarks to Dynamic Protocol: Agent-Centric Text Anomaly Detection for Evaluating LLM Reasoning
On the map: LLM reasoning → Reasoning for agents, planning and code
also in 1 more
Abstract (arXiv)
The evaluation of large language models (LLMs) has predominantly relied on static datasets, which offer limited scalability and fail to capture the evolving reasoning capabilities of recent models. To overcome these limitations, we propose an agent-centric benchmarking paradigm that moves beyond static datasets by introducing a dynamic protocol in which autonomous agents iteratively generate, validate, and solve problems. Within this protocol, a teacher agent generates candidate problems, an orchestrator agent rigorously verifies their validity and guards against adversarial attacks, and a student agent attempts to solve the validated problems. An invalid problem is revised by the teacher agent until it passes validation. If the student correctly solves the problem, the orchestrator prompts the teacher to generate more challenging variants. Consequently, the benchmark scales in difficulty automatically as more capable agents are substituted into any role, enabling progressive evaluation of large language models without manually curated datasets. Adopting text anomaly detection as our primary evaluation format, which demands cross-sentence logical inference and resists pattern-matching shortcuts, we demonstrate that this protocol systematically exposes corner-case reasoning errors that conventional benchmarks fail to reveal. We further advocate evaluating systems along several complementary axes including cross-model pairwise performance and progress between the initial and orchestrator-finalized problems. By shifting the focus from fixed datasets to dynamic protocols, our approach offers a sustainable direction for evaluating ever-evolving language models and introduces a research agenda centered on the co-evolution of agent-centric benchmarks.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Reasoning for agents, planning and code, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning. Builds on 16 of its 43 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 27 Feb 2026.
Builds on
16 of 43 references.
References · 16
- 2024The Llama 3 Herd of Modelscited by 14,192
- 2021Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problemscited by 9,743
- 2021Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Codecited by 8,053
- 2024Gemini 1.5: Unlocking multimodal understanding across millions of tokens of contextcited by 3,175
- 2023ToolLLM: Facilitating Large Language Models to Master 16000+ Real-world APIscited by 1,880
- 2023AgentBench: Evaluating LLMs as Agentscited by 1,211
- 2025Humanity's Last Examcited by 467
- 2020Fine-Tuning Pretrained Language Models: Weight Initializations, Data Orders, and Early Stoppingcited by 377
- 2023Detecting Pretraining Data from Large Language Modelscited by 375
- 2024VisualAgentBench: Towards Large Multimodal Models as Visual Foundation Agentscited by 101
- 2024PersonaGym: Evaluating Persona Agents and LLMscited by 89
- 2024Dynamic Evaluation of Large Language Models by Meta Probing Agentscited by 54
4 more
- 2023Summarization is (Almost) Deadcited by 43
- 2024Artificial Intelligence Index Report 2024cited by 22
- 2023Disco-Bench: A Discourse-Aware Evaluation Benchmark for Language Modellingcited by 10
- 2025Meeseeks: A Feedback-Driven, Iterative Self-Correction Benchmark evaluating LLMs' Instruction Following Capabilitycited by 3
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.
1 paper.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2024AgentQuest: A Modular Benchmark Framework to Measure Progress and Improve LLM Agents
- 2025LMR-BENCH: Evaluating LLM Agent's Ability on Reproducing Language Modeling Research
- 2026AnomalyAgent: Training-Free Agentic Models for Zero-/Few-Shot Anomaly Detection
- 2024Benchmark Self-Evolving: A Multi-Agent Framework for Dynamic LLM Evaluation
- 2025JudgeAgent: Beyond Static Benchmarks for Knowledge-Driven and Dynamic LLM Evaluation
- 2025IDA-Bench: Evaluating LLMs on Interactive Guided Data Analysis
- 2024Can Large Language Models be Trusted for Evaluation? Scalable Meta-Evaluation of LLMs as Evaluators via Agent Debate
- 2025Challenges in Testing Large Language Model Based Software: A Faceted Taxonomy