# From Inertia to Objectivity: Improving Deep Research Agents with Noise Isolation

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.23045 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2608.23045/

## Key facts

- Cited by 1 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Web, search, and research agents, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use.
- Builds on 31 of its 47 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 24 Aug 2026.

## Placed in

- LLM agents and tool use / [Web, search, and research agents](https://mlsanity.com/agents/web-search-and-research-agents/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 30 of 31)

- [DeepSeekMath: Pushing the Limits of Mathematical Reasoning in Open Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.03300/) (2024)
- [ReAct: Synergizing Reasoning and Acting in Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.03629/) (2022)
- [Reflexion: Language Agents with Verbal Reinforcement Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.11366/) (2023)
- [MemGPT: Towards LLMs as Operating Systems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.08560/) (2023)
- [GAIA: a benchmark for General AI Assistants](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.12983/) (2023)
- [A-MEM: Agentic Memory for LLM Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.12110/) (2025)
- [Towards Understanding Sycophancy in Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.13548/) (2023)
- [DeepSeek-V4: Towards Highly Efficient Million-Token Context Intelligence](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.19348/) (2026)
- [Large Language Models Cannot Self-Correct Reasoning Yet](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.01798/) (2023)
- [Discovering Language Model Behaviors with Model-Written Evaluations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.09251/) (2022)
- [CRITIC: Large Language Models Can Self-Correct with Tool-Interactive Critiquing](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.11738/) (2023)
- [BrowseComp: A Simple Yet Challenging Benchmark for Browsing Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.12516/) (2025)
- [PlanBench: An Extensible Benchmark for Evaluating Large Language Models on Planning and Reasoning about Change](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2206.10498/) (2022)
- [WebThinker: Empowering Large Reasoning Models with Deep Research Capability](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.21776/) (2025)
- [WebSailor: Navigating Super-human Reasoning for Web Agent](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.02592/) (2025)
- [Chain of Agents: Large Language Models Collaborating on Long-Context Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.02818/) (2024)
- [APIGen: Automated Pipeline for Generating Verifiable and Diverse Function-Calling Datasets](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.18518/) (2024)
- [WebWalker: Benchmarking LLMs in Web Traversal](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.07572/) (2025)
- [BrowseComp-ZH: Benchmarking Web Browsing Ability of Large Language Models in Chinese](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.19314/) (2025)
- [OWL: Optimized Workforce Learning for General Multi-Agent Assistance in Real-World Task Automation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.23885/) (2025)
- [WebShaper: Agentically Data Synthesizing via Information-Seeking Formalization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.15061/) (2025)
- [Agentic Reasoning: A Streamlined Framework for Enhancing LLM Reasoning with Agentic Tools](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.04644/) (2025)
- [Agent KB: Leveraging Cross-Domain Experience for Agentic Problem Solving](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.06229/) (2025)
- [WebExplorer: Explore and Evolve for Training Long-Horizon Web Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.06501/) (2025)
- [Rethinking External Slow-Thinking: From Snowball Errors to Probability of Correct Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.15602/) (2025)
- [Characterizing Deep Research: A Benchmark and Formal Definition](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2508.04183/) (2025)
- [BrowseMaster: Towards Scalable Web Browsing via Tool-Augmented Programmatic Agent Pair](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2508.09129/) (2025)
- [MiroFlow: Towards High-Performance and Robust Open-Source Agent Framework for General Deep Research Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.22808/) (2026)
- [MemoBrain: Executive Memory as an Agentic Brain for Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.08079/) (2026)
- [Unveiling Confirmation Bias in Chain-of-Thought Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.12301/) (2025)

## Built on by (most cited first, 1 of 1)

- [Judged Useless, Queried Anyway: Tool-Using Agents Rarely Turn Their Own Evidence Judgments into Stopping Decisions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2610.06191/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Web search agents powered by Large Language Models (LLMs) show strong promise, but deep research tasks expose a recurring failure mode: once an agent has produced a query, plan, or intermediate conclusion, it becomes less objective when later judging the consequences of that same action. We term this phenomenon inertia bias. To make it measurable, we introduce the IBIS benchmark, which controls the search observations while varying whether the model is evaluating the outcome of its own prior action. We find that models are substantially worse when they "own" the preceding search step, showing that self-authored action history can systematically distort subsequent judgment. We further show that this bias propagates into two forms of system-level degradation: search noise at the worker level and contextual noise at the manager level. To address this problem, we propose NIS-Agent, which applies context isolation at the two decision points most vulnerable to inertia bias: webpage triage and final-answer validation. Across GAIA, WebWalkerQA, BrowseComp, and BrowseComp-zh, NIS-Agent achieves competitive performance while reducing token cost by 33% compared to our baseline. We further train an 8B model to be intrinsically more resistant to inertia bias; under the same NIS-Agent framework, it attains average performance comparable to GPT-4o on deep research benchmarks. Our code is publicly available at https://github.com/PangSMPang/NIS-Agent.