BenchShield: Formal Model-Backed Instrumentation for Reward Integrity in LLM-Agent Evaluation Infrastructure
On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Software engineering coding agents
Abstract (arXiv)
LM-agent benchmarks increasingly function as interactive evaluation infrastructure. Agents observe state, call tools, modify workspaces, submit artifacts, and receive rewards from outcome procedures. This interactivity makes evaluations vulnerable to reward hacking: an agent improves its measured score by exploiting the reward-relevant trajectory instead of solving the intended task. Existing defenses rely largely on task-specific patches, prompt instructions, or post-hoc detectors. They do not provide reusable evidence that a concrete run remained within its intended evaluation boundary. This paper presents BenchShield, a model-backed instrumentation layer for reward integrity in LLM-agent evaluation. BenchShield grounds detection in a finite lifecycle model of an evaluation's reward-relevant events. Within the benchmark infrastructure, two complementary analyses operate over this model. A static, phase-aware taint analysis exposes reward-hacking paths before a run. Its runtime counterpart uses infrastructure-side evidence to attribute concrete agent use and emit evidence-backed claims. We construct BenchShield Trajectories, a human-labeled corpus of 456 adjudicated trajectories from more than 31,000 public agent runs across three benchmarks. Compared with an agentic hackability scanner baseline on the same tasks and model, BenchShield improves full-chain recall from 23-94% to 77-100%, same-vector coverage from 16-56% to 43-78%, and reduces per-task cost by up to 65%. Its runtime analysis achieves 96% accuracy in detecting reward hacking from infrastructure-side evidence.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Software engineering coding agents, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 25 of its 75 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 10 Sep 2026.
Builds on
25 of 75 references.
Closest ancestors · 5
Same direction, newest first
- 2026Lean4Agent: Formal Modeling and Verification for Agent Workflow and Trajectory2 Jun
- 2026Harness-Bench: Measuring Harness Effects across Models in Realistic Agent Workflows27 May
- 2026RewardHackingAgents: Benchmarking Evaluation Integrity for LLM ML-Engineering Agents11 Mar
- 2024SpecRover: Code Intent Extraction via LLMs5 Aug
- 2024AppWorld: A Controllable World of Apps and People for Benchmarking Interactive Coding Agents26 Jul
Other references · 20
- 2016Concrete Problems in AI Safetycited by 1,582
- 2024StruQ: Defending Against Prompt Injection with Structured Queriescited by 325
- 2022The Effects of Reward Misspecification: Mapping and Mitigating Misaligned Modelscited by 312
- 2026SkillsBench: Benchmarking How Well Agent Skills Work Across Diverse Taskscited by 289
- 2020PettingZoo: Gym for Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learningcited by 209
- 2017AI Safety Gridworldscited by 108
- 2026ClawsBench: Evaluating Capability and Safety of LLM Productivity Agents in Simulated Workspacescited by 31
- 2026Reward Hacking Benchmark: Measuring Exploits in LLM Agents with Tool Usecited by 25
- 2025EvilGenie: A Reward Hacking Benchmarkcited by 24
- 2017Identifying Patch Correctness in Test-Based Program Repaircited by 16
- 2025Indirect Prompt Injections: Are Firewalls All You Need, or Stronger Benchmarks?cited by 16
- 2026Do Androids Dream of Breaking the Game? Systematically Auditing AI Agent Benchmarks with BenchJackcited by 13
8 more
- 2026Detecting Safety Violations Across Many Agent Tracescited by 11
- 2026Automated Benchmark Auditing for AI Agents and Large Language Modelscited by 10
- 2018A Survey of Challenges for Runtime Verification from Advanced Application Domains (Beyond Software)cited by 9
- 2026Hack-Verifiable Environments: Towards Evaluating Reward Hacking at Scalecited by 9
- 2026Reinforced Agent: Inference-Time Feedback for Tool-Calling Agentscited by 6
- 2026Capability Gates Are Not Authorization: Confused-Deputy Failures in LLM Agent Frameworkscited by 6
- 2026TRACES: Proactive Safety Auditing for Multi-Turn LLM Agents via Trajectory-State Modelingcited by 5
- 2026Let it Flow: A Formally Verified Compilation Framework for Asynchronous Dataflowcited by 1
Built on by
Not cited yet.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026Maintaining Benchmarks Against Increasingly Capable Agents: Detection and Remediation of Unearned Passes
- 2026BAITBENCH: Measuring Agent Reward Hacking with Optional Shortcuts Planted in ML Tasks
- 2026Do Agent Benchmarks Measure Capability? Protocol Validity in the Age of Agentic AI
- 2026ToolPRMBench: Evaluating and Advancing Process Reward Models for Tool-using Agents
- 2026Beyond Task Completion: Revealing Corrupt Success in LLM Agents through Procedure-Aware Evaluation
- 2026Hack-Verifiable Terminal Bench: Evaluating Reward Hacking in Terminal Tasks
- 2026SpecBench: Measuring Reward Hacking in Long-Horizon Coding Agents
- 2026From Reward-Hack Activations to Agentic Risk States: Context-Calibrated Mechanistic Monitoring in LLM Agents