mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

NeuroState-Bench: A Human-Calibrated Benchmark for Commitment Integrity in LLM Agent Profiles

arXiv 2605.01847 ↗First posted 3 May 2026cs.AIcited by 0

On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Software engineering coding agents

Abstract (arXiv)

Outcome-only evaluation under-specifies whether an evaluated agent profile preserves the commitments required to solve a multi-turn task coherently. NeuroState-Bench is a human-calibrated benchmark that operationalizes commitment integrity through benchmark-defined side-query probes rather than inferred hidden activations. The released inventory contains 144 deterministic tasks and 306 benchmark-defined side-query probes spanning eight cognitively motivated failure families, paired clean and distractor variants, and three difficulty bands. The main 32-profile evaluation contains a fixed 16-profile local subset and a matched 16-profile hosted large-model subset evaluated through the same benchmark pipeline. Human calibration uses the final merged reporting scope: 104 sampled task units, 216 raw annotations, and 108 adjudicated task rows, with weighted kappa = 0.977 and ICC(2,1) = 0.977. Empirically, task success and commitment integrity diverge across this expanded grid: the success leader is not the integrity leader, 31 of 32 profiles change rank when integrity replaces task success, and integrity rankings are more stable under distractor perturbation. The primary confidence-free score HCCIS-CORE reaches 0.8469 AUC and 0.6992 PR-AUC for post-probe diagnostic discrimination of terminal task failure; the legacy full heuristic variant HCCIS-FULL reaches 0.7997 AUC and 0.6410 PR-AUC. Probe accuracy and state drift achieve slightly higher ROC-AUC, 0.8587, and better Brier/ECE, while HCCIS-CORE has substantially higher point-estimate PR-AUC and remains more closely tied to the benchmark's intended construct. The exploratory neural-augmented variant HCCIS+N is weaker overall, and a randomized subspace control approaches chance. NeuroState-Bench therefore contributes a calibrated evaluation axis for exposing commitment failures over a broader model grid than the original local-only subset.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Software engineering coding agents, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 15 of its 28 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 3 May 2026.

Builds on

15 of 28 references.

References · 15

  1. 2017On Calibration of Modern Neural Networkscited by 4,960
  2. 2023SWE-bench: Can Language Models Resolve Real-World GitHub Issues?cited by 3,373
  3. 2023WebArena: A Realistic Web Environment for Building Autonomous Agentscited by 2,006
  4. 2024τ-bench: A Benchmark for Tool-Agent-User Interaction in Real-World Domainscited by 1,402
  5. 2024OSWorld: Benchmarking Multimodal Agents for Open-Ended Tasks in Real Computer Environmentscited by 1,195
  6. 2023GAIA: a benchmark for General AI Assistantscited by 1,128
  7. 2024LongMemEval: Benchmarking Chat Assistants on Long-Term Interactive Memorycited by 707
  8. 2023Measuring Faithfulness in Chain-of-Thought Reasoningcited by 703
  9. 2024WorkArena: How Capable Are Web Agents at Solving Common Knowledge Work Tasks?cited by 363
  10. 2023Faithful Chain-of-Thought Reasoningcited by 288
  11. 2024Benchmark Data Contamination of Large Language Models: A Surveycited by 147
  12. 2025MemBench: Towards More Comprehensive Evaluation on the Memory of LLM-based Agentscited by 84
3 more
  1. 2026AMA-Bench: Evaluating Long-Horizon Memory for Agentic Applicationscited by 53
  2. 2026A Neuropsychologically Grounded Evaluation of LLM Cognitive Abilitiescited by 5
  3. 2026CheeseBench: Evaluating Large Language Models on Rodent Behavioral Neuroscience Paradigmscited by 1

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026Maintaining Benchmarks Against Increasingly Capable Agents: Detection and Remediation of Unearned Passes
  2. 2026Long-Horizon-Terminal-Bench 2.0: Automating Diverse Task Construction and Measuring Sustained Agent Progress
  3. 2026Testing-Driven Reliability Audit of Trajectory-Based Early Outcome Prediction for LLM Agents: Target-Specific Calibration Transfer Persists Within a Single Benchmark
  4. 2026Beyond Task Completion: Revealing Corrupt Success in LLM Agents through Procedure-Aware Evaluation
  5. 2026From Confident Closing to Silent Failure: Characterizing False Success in LLM Agents
  6. 2026The Unreliable Progress Bar: Can LLM Agents Reliably Report Task Progress Throughout Execution?
  7. 2026BenchShield: Formal Model-Backed Instrumentation for Reward Integrity in LLM-Agent Evaluation Infrastructure
  8. 2026The Double Measurement Confound in Agent Benchmarks: De-Scaffolding, Ground-Truth Scoring, and Reliability Beyond the Mean