Asking for What Was Never Requested: Horizontal and Vertical Proactivity in Agents
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
An agent that uses tools typically responds to what the user explicitly asks, yet completing the task may require information the user never requested. Work on proactive agents mainly studies whether and when an agent should act on its own, not what information it should pursue. We study a distinct axis of proactivity: its content. Horizontal proactivity pursues unstated information that the current context already identifies, and vertical proactivity pursues needs that only earlier evidence reveals. A need graph, recovered from a benchmark's own decomposition, records which needs depend on which, so both forms, and whether the agent stops at the right time, can be scored from a transcript without a model judge. To learn this behavior, we propose Q&D (questioner and drafter), which trains a questioner to prefer the question whose continuation retrieves more of the required evidence, with no reward model or judge. On held-out splits of three multi-hop question-answering benchmarks, at equal retrieval spend, the trained questioner improves both forms of proactivity over the same model, prompted, and outperforms a prompted model 15× larger in the same role on two of the three, and the gain persists after controlling for question volume and length. Without further training, we place the questioner in an interactive customer-service agent with a simulated customer, where it completes more tasks while asking fewer questions, and in retail it outperforms the 15× larger model with fewer follow-up turns from the customer. These results show that proactivity depends not only on whether an agent acts without being asked, but also on what it chooses to pursue and when it stops.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 86 of its 108 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 29 Sep 2026.
Builds on
86 of 108 references.
References · 86
- 2025Qwen3 Technical Reportcited by 8,820
- 2022ReAct: Synergizing Reasoning and Acting in Language Modelscited by 8,695
- 2023Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arenacited by 8,626
- 2023Direct Preference Optimization: Your Language Model is Secretly a Reward Modelcited by 8,065
- 2023Self-RAG: Learning to Retrieve, Generate, and Critique through Self-Reflectioncited by 1,839
- 2025Search-R1: Training LLMs to Reason and Leverage Search Engines with Reinforcement Learningcited by 1,444
- 2022Least-to-Most Prompting Enables Complex Reasoning in Large Language Modelscited by 1,407
- 2025gpt-oss-120b & gpt-oss-20b Model Cardcited by 1,386
- 2020Constructing A Multi-hop QA Dataset for Comprehensive Evaluation of Reasoning Stepscited by 1,282
- 2015A Diversity-Promoting Objective Function for Neural Conversation Modelscited by 1,077
- 2022Measuring and Narrowing the Compositionality Gap in Language Modelscited by 1,075
- 2025Does Reinforcement Learning Really Incentivize Reasoning Capacity in LLMs Beyond the Base Model?cited by 982
38 more
- 2024SimPO: Simple Preference Optimization with a Reference-Free Rewardcited by 963
- 2023Math-Shepherd: Verify and Reinforce LLMs Step-by-step without Human Annotationscited by 928
- 2022Interleaving Retrieval with Chain-of-Thought Reasoning for Knowledge-Intensive Multi-Step Questionscited by 923
- 2021MuSiQue: Multihop Questions via Single-hop Question Compositioncited by 916
- 2023A General Theoretical Paradigm to Understand Learning from Human Preferencescited by 912
- 2021Did Aristotle Use a Laptop? A Question Answering Benchmark with Implicit Reasoning Strategiescited by 743
- 2025τ2-Bench: Evaluating Conversational Agents in a Dual-Control Environmentcited by 627
- 2025GEPA: Reflective Prompt Evolution Can Outperform Reinforcement Learningcited by 542
- 2023Active Retrieval Augmented Generationcited by 516
- 2024Adaptive-RAG: Learning to Adapt Retrieval-Augmented Large Language Models through Question Complexitycited by 451
- 2025WebThinker: Empowering Large Reasoning Models with Deep Research Capabilitycited by 335
- 2023A Long Way to Go: Investigating Length Correlations in RLHFcited by 291
- 2024Step-DPO: Step-wise Preference Optimization for Long-chain Reasoning of LLMscited by 273
- 2024Self-Preference Bias in LLM-as-a-Judgecited by 258
- 2024AI Agents That Mattercited by 219
- 2025AI Agents vs. Agentic AI: A Conceptual Taxonomy, Applications and Challengescited by 169
- 2024Fact, Fetch, and Reason: A Unified Evaluation of Retrieval-Augmented Generationcited by 162
- 2024Adding Error Bars to Evals: A Statistical Approach to Language Model Evaluationscited by 148
- 2025AbstentionBench: Reasoning LLMs Fail on Unanswerable Questionscited by 145
- 2019Asking Clarifying Questions in Open-Domain Information-Seeking Conversationscited by 139
- 2022The 'Problem' of Human Label Variation: On Ground Truth in Data, Modeling and Evaluationcited by 139
- 2024Provably Robust DPO: Aligning Language Models with Noisy Feedbackcited by 135
- 2020Break It Down: A Question Understanding Benchmarkcited by 131
- 2018Learning to Ask Good Questions: Ranking Clarification Questions using Neural Expected Value of Perfect Informationcited by 115
- 2024STaR-GATE: Teaching Language Models to Ask Clarifying Questionscited by 104
- 2025Establishing Best Practices for Building Rigorous Agentic Benchmarkscited by 102
- 2024Proactive Agent: Shifting LLM Agents from Reactive Responses to Active Assistancecited by 87
- 2025Reasoning or Memorization? Unreliable Results of Reinforcement Learning Due to Data Contaminationcited by 82
- 2024Modeling Future Conversation Turns to Teach LLMs to Ask Clarifying Questionscited by 76
- 2025UserBench: An Interactive Gym Environment for User-Centric Agentscited by 76
- 2025QuestBench: Can LLMs ask the right question to acquire information in reasoning tasks?cited by 63
- 2024Learning to Clarify: Multi-turn Conversations with Action-Based Contrastive Self-Trainingcited by 57
- 2025Training Proactive and Personalized LLM Agentscited by 46
- 2025Cost-of-Pass: An Economic Framework for Evaluating Language Modelscited by 35
- 2025Search Self-play: Pushing the Frontier of Agent Capability without Supervisioncited by 34
- 2025UserRL: Training Interactive User-Centric Agent via Reinforcement Learningcited by 32
- 2024REAR: A Relevance-Aware Retrieval-Augmented Framework for Open-Domain Question Answeringcited by 28
- 2026Reliability without Validity: A Systematic, Large-Scale Evaluation of LLM-as-a-Judge Models Across Agreement, Consistency, and Biascited by 28
50 most cited of 86 All 86 (JSON)
Built on by
Not cited yet.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2024Redefining Proactivity for Information Seeking Dialogue
- 2026Clarify User Expertise: Towards Proactive Conversational Agents Tailoring Responses to User Proficiency
- 2026HiL-Bench (Human-in-Loop Benchmark): Do Agents Know When to Ask for Help?
- 2026Knowing When to Ask: Self-Gated Clarification for Hierarchical Language Agents
- 2026From Question Answering to Task Completion: A Survey on Agent System and Harness Design
- 2026Track, Rank, Crack: Epistemic Working Memory Scales Multi-Hop Reasoning in Language Agents
- 2026Active Inference as Context Acquisition for AI Agents
- 2026Agentic-R: Learning to Retrieve for Agentic Search