mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

OpenHarmony Bench: Evaluating LLMs and Coding Agents on OpenHarmony App Development

arXiv 2608.16022 ↗First posted 17 Aug 2026cs.SEcited by 0

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

Abstract (arXiv)

We present OPENHARMONY BENCH, an app-level coding benchmark for evaluating LLM-based coding agents on OpenHarmony ArkTS applications. Unlike function-level benchmarks, it evaluates complete app-level changes: each task requires an agent to modify a buildable ArkTS project so that a requested behavior works end to end, involving UI state, data persistence, build configuration, and platform APIs. The benchmark installs and drives the delivered application on a device to check whether the behavior is observable. It covers three input sources: natural-language feature requests (new-feature), structured scenario specifications (spec-driven), and bug descriptions (bug-fix). The benchmark contains 153 top-level tasks and 242 Feature points (F-points), where an F-point is one executable behavior check. The snapshot includes 32 new-feature tasks, 50 spec-driven tasks with 139 F-points, and 71 bug-fix tasks. The main leaderboard is scored over top-level tasks rather than independently weighted F-points. We describe the benchmark construction, statistics, and build-and-test evaluation pipeline, and evaluate DevEco Code with eight LLMs across three independent full-suite runs per configuration. Three findings emerge. First, newer generations complete more tasks than their predecessors within evaluated model-family pairs. Second, buildability is close to saturated while behavioral correctness is not: mean Final Build Success Rate is 94.77% to 100.00%, whereas mean Task Completion is 48.36% to 58.39%. Third, spec-driven tasks have the lowest Task Completion under all-checks task scoring, with no configuration exceeding 35%. The code, data, tasks, reference solutions, tests, evaluation scripts, and leaderboard are released through the official OPENHARMONY BENCH website at https://bench.matrix.openharmony.cn/.

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 25 of its 35 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 17 Aug 2026.

Builds on

25 of 35 references.

Closest ancestors · 3

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2025SWE-Compass: Towards Unified Evaluation of Agentic Coding Abilities for Large Language Models7 Nov
  2. 2024Agentless: Demystifying LLM-based Software Engineering Agents1 Jul
  3. 2024SWE-agent: Agent-Computer Interfaces Enable Automated Software Engineering6 May

Other references · 22

  1. 2021Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Codecited by 8,320
  2. 2021Program Synthesis with Large Language Modelscited by 3,637
  3. 2023SWE-bench: Can Language Models Resolve Real-World GitHub Issues?cited by 3,373
  4. 2021Measuring Coding Challenge Competence With APPScited by 902
  5. 2021CodeXGLUE: A Machine Learning Benchmark Dataset for Code Understanding and Generationcited by 744
  6. 2024BigCodeBench: Benchmarking Code Generation with Diverse Function Calls and Complex Instructionscited by 546
  7. 2024AndroidWorld: A Dynamic Benchmarking Environment for Autonomous Agentscited by 468
  8. 2022DS-1000: A Natural and Reliable Benchmark for Data Science Code Generationcited by 452
  9. 2023Android in the Wild: A Large-Scale Dataset for Android Device Controlcited by 319
  10. 2024Mobile-Agent: Autonomous Multi-Modal Mobile Device Agent with Visual Perceptioncited by 293
  11. 2024SWE-bench Multimodal: Do AI Systems Generalize to Visual Software Domains?cited by 203
  12. 2025Multi-SWE-bench: A Multilingual Benchmark for Issue Resolvingcited by 171
10 more
  1. 2024SPA-Bench: A Comprehensive Benchmark for SmartPhone Agent Evaluationcited by 81
  2. 2024Mobile-Bench: An Evaluation Benchmark for LLM-based Mobile Agentscited by 56
  3. 2024Benchmarking Mobile Device Control Agents across Diverse Configurationscited by 55
  4. 2025DesignBench: A Comprehensive Benchmark for MLLM-based Front-end Code Generationcited by 45
  5. 2026WebCoderBench: Benchmarking Web Application Generation with Comprehensive and Interpretable Evaluation Metricscited by 18
  6. 2025You Don't Know Until You Click:Automated GUI Testing for Production-Ready Software Evaluationcited by 12
  7. 2024WebApp1K: A Practical Code-Generation Benchmark for Web App Developmentcited by 11
  8. 2026PlayCoder: Making LLM-Generated GUI Code Playablecited by 11
  9. 2023Pairwise GUI Dataset Construction Between Android Phones and Tabletscited by 1
  10. 2026Source-Free Detection and Impact Analysis of Compiler Optimization Problems in Mobile Applicationscited by 1

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026FeatureBench: Benchmarking Agentic Coding for Complex Feature Development
  2. 2026ProjDevBench: Benchmarking AI Coding Agents on End-to-End Project Development
  3. 2026ABC-Bench: Benchmarking Agentic Backend Coding in Real-World Development
  4. 2025SWE-PolyBench: A multi-language benchmark for repository level evaluation of coding agents
  5. 2025AInsteinBench: Benchmarking Coding Agents on Scientific Repositories
  6. 2026EvoCode-Bench: Evaluating Coding Agents in Multi-Turn Iterative Interactions
  7. 2026SWE-NFI: Studying and Benchmarking Coding Agents for Non-Functional Improvements
  8. 2026Asuka-Bench: Benchmarking Code Agents on Underspecified User Intent and Multi-Round Refinement