OSWorld-Pro: Process-based Evaluation for Computer Use Agents
On the map: LLM agents and tool use → GUI and mobile agents
Abstract (arXiv)
Evaluation of Computer-Use Agents (CUAs) is often limited to the final deliverables they create (at the end of hundreds of steps) and assessed with functional verifiers, as seen in OSWorld. However, such evaluation of end-state performance lacks transparency into how and why agents fail in various tasks, obfuscating critical insight for subsequent improvement. For instance, agents that err during keyboard inputs would require a different mitigation strategy from those that fail to precisely provide click-based inputs on the graphical UI. We introduce OSWorld-Pro: a set of over 300 tasks containing over 2800 subgoals to enable the procedural evaluation of CUAs grounded in over 67,000 human annotations. We use robust human-aligned LLM-Judges to evaluate the fulfillment of OSWorld-Pro subgoals and thereby reveal the progress that models make throughout a series of sequentially dependent subgoals. Our findings reveal that OSWorld-Pro is challenging even for state-of-the-art LLMs, with top performers like Claude Opus 5 achieving only 75.7% vs. 83.4% on OSWorld. Furthermore, we identify critical process-focused failure modes of various models (e.g. subgoal-irrelevant actions and click-based mistakes) to provide insights to improve performance and efficiency of CUAs.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in GUI and mobile agents, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 12 of its 23 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 21 Sep 2026.
Builds on
12 of 23 references.
Closest ancestors · 3
Same direction, newest first
- 2026ChainWorld: Composing Long-Horizon Desktop Workloads from Atomic OSWorld Tasks19 Jun
- 2025OpenCUA: Open Foundations for Computer-Use Agents12 Aug
- 2024OSWorld: Benchmarking Multimodal Agents for Open-Ended Tasks in Real Computer Environments11 Apr
Other references · 9
- 2021Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problemscited by 10,109
- 2023GPQA: A Graduate-Level Google-Proof Q&A Benchmarkcited by 2,879
- 2024LiveCodeBench: Holistic and Contamination Free Evaluation of Large Language Models for Codecited by 2,004
- 2025Rubrics as Rewards: Reinforcement Learning Beyond Verifiable Domainscited by 366
- 2025PaperBench: Evaluating AI's Ability to Replicate AI Researchcited by 321
- 2024ProcessBench: Identifying Process Errors in Mathematical Reasoningcited by 292
- 2025Implicit Reasoning in Large Language Models: A Comprehensive Surveycited by 43
- 2025ProfBench: Multi-Domain Rubrics requiring Professional Knowledge to Answer and Judgecited by 24
- 2025HelpSteer3: Human-Annotated Feedback and Edit Data to Empower Inference-Time Scaling in Open-Ended General-Domain Taskscited by 17
Built on by
Not cited yet.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026OSWorld 2.0: Benchmarking Computer Use Agents on Long-Horizon Real-World Tasks
- 2025OSWorld-Human: Benchmarking the Efficiency of Computer-Use Agents
- 2025OSWorld-MCP: Benchmarking MCP Tool Invocation In Computer-Use Agents
- 2026MacArena: Benchmarking Computer Use Agents on an Online macOS Environment
- 2024Windows Agent Arena: Evaluating Multi-Modal OS Agents at Scale
- 2026CUAAudit: Meta-Evaluation of Vision-Language Models as Auditors of Autonomous Computer-Use Agents
- 2026WindowsWorld: A Process-Centric Benchmark of Autonomous GUI Agents in Professional Cross-Application Environments
- 2026OSWorld-Science: A Benchmark of Computer Use Agents for Learning and Using Scientific Software