DeltaSelect: Affordable A/B Testing for Coding Agents
New in LLM agents and tool use; no direction yet. LLM agents and tool use
Abstract (arXiv)
Coding-agent benchmarks are built for broad and comprehensive comparisons, not frequent development decisions. Individual runs vary, full suites are expensive, and the benchmark harness may differ from the harness used in practice. In a resampling analysis of DeepSWE's published trials, only 19.5% of tasks (22 of 113) had a fifth-percentile Pearson correlation of at least 0.50 with full-benchmark performance. The paper presents DeltaSelect, an open-source method that identifies tasks whose one-run results consistently track full-benchmark performance using Pearson correlation, maps fractional verifier results to a common score using linear regression, and selects a fixed task set within a dollar budget. DeltaSelect is intended for repeated baseline-versus-candidate comparisons during development, not model rankings. In a gpt-5.6-luna low-reasoning case study, DeltaSelect was used to revise custom skills and instructions. Across 13 evaluations, the recorded cost was USD 27.86 at rates published August 16, 2026. The adopted version cost 58.1% less than the initial version (USD 1.75 versus USD 4.18; p=0.008), while the calibrated score was higher (42.36% versus 36.46%; published-analog variance p=0.326).
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 10 of its 24 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 17 Sep 2026.
Builds on
10 of 24 references.
References · 10
- 2023SWE-bench: Can Language Models Resolve Real-World GitHub Issues?cited by 3,373
- 2024SWE-agent: Agent-Computer Interfaces Enable Automated Software Engineeringcited by 1,737
- 2026SkillsBench: Benchmarking How Well Agent Skills Work Across Diverse Taskscited by 315
- 2024tinyBenchmarks: evaluating LLMs with fewer examplescited by 310
- 2024AI Agents That Mattercited by 219
- 2021Accounting for Variance in Machine Learning Benchmarkscited by 201
- 2021Active Testing: Sample-Efficient Model Evaluationcited by 82
- 2026Harness-Bench: Measuring Harness Effects across Models in Realistic Agent Workflowscited by 57
- 2026DeepSWE: Measuring Frontier Coding Agents on Original, Long-Horizon Engineering Taskscited by 49
- 2022Active Surrogate Estimators: An Active Learning Approach to Label-Efficient Model Evaluationcited by 26
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.
1 paper.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026TestJack: Should you trust the results in coding benchmarks? Agentic Coding Benchmarks Auditing via Evaluator Evolution
- 2026ParEvalLayer: When Partial LLM-Agent Evaluations Support a Decision
- 2026AgentLens: Production-Assessed Trajectory Reviews for Coding Agent Evaluation
- 2026OpenHarmony Bench: Evaluating LLMs and Coding Agents on OpenHarmony App Development
- 2026Building to the Test: Coding Agents Deliver What You Check, Not What You Requested
- 2026Trajectory-Aware Benchmark Subset Selection for Cost-Efficient Software Engineering Agent Regression Testing
- 2026ISO-Bench: Can Coding Agents Optimize Real-World Inference Workloads?
- 2026TML-Bench: Benchmark for Data Science Agents on Tabular ML Tasks