mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

AgentPulse: A Continuous Multi-Signal Framework for Evaluating AI Agents in Deployment

arXiv 2604.24038 ↗First posted 27 Apr 2026cs.AI cs.CL cs.SEcited by 1

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Static benchmarks measure what AI agents can do at a fixed point in time but not how they are adopted, maintained, or experienced in deployment. We introduce AgentPulse, a continuous evaluation framework scoring 50 agents across 10 workload categories along four factors (Benchmark Performance, Adoption Signals, Community Sentiment, and Ecosystem Health) aggregated from 18 real-time signals across GitHub, package registries, IDE marketplaces, social platforms, and benchmark leaderboards. Three analyses ground the framework. The four factors capture largely complementary information (n=50; ρmax=0.61 for Adoption-Ecosystem, all others |ρ| ≤ 0.37). A circularity-controlled test (n=35) shows the Benchmark+Sentiment sub-composite, which contains no GitHub-derived signals, predicts external adoption proxies it does not aggregate: GitHub stars (ρs=0.52, p<0.01) and Stack Overflow question volume (ρs=0.49, p<0.01), with VS Code installs (ρs=0.44, p<0.05) reported as illustrative given that only 11 of 35 agents have non-zero installs. On the n=11 subset with published SWE-bench scores, composite and benchmark-only rankings are nearly uncorrelated (ρs=0.25; 9 of 11 agents shift by at least 2 ranks), driven by a strong negative Adoption-Capability correlation among closed-source high-capability agents within this subset. This is precisely why we rest the framework's validity claim on the broader n=35 test rather than the SWE-bench overlap. AgentPulse surfaces deployment signal absent from benchmarks; it is a methodology, not a ground-truth ranking. The framework, all collected signals, scoring outputs, and evaluation harness are released under CC BY 4.0.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 10 of its 15 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 27 Apr 2026.

Builds on

10 of 15 references.

References · 10

  1. 2023Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arenacited by 8,626
  2. 2021Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Codecited by 8,320
  3. 2019DistilBERT, a distilled version of BERT: smaller, faster, cheaper and lightercited by 4,307
  4. 2023SWE-bench: Can Language Models Resolve Real-World GitHub Issues?cited by 3,373
  5. 2024τ-bench: A Benchmark for Tool-Agent-User Interaction in Real-World Domainscited by 1,402
  6. 2023AgentBench: Evaluating LLMs as Agentscited by 1,267
  7. 2024Chatbot Arena: An Open Platform for Evaluating LLMs by Human Preferencecited by 1,184
  8. 2023GAIA: a benchmark for General AI Assistantscited by 1,128
  9. 2019FinBERT: Financial Sentiment Analysis with Pre-trained Language Modelscited by 385
  10. 2021AI and the Everything in the Whole Wide World Benchmarkcited by 349

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.

1 paper.