mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Before They Can Solve: Predicting Post-Training Coding-Agent Performance from Base Models

arXiv 2610.10478 ↗First posted 7 Oct 2026cs.AI cs.SEcited by 0

On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Agent skill learning and evolution also fits: Software engineering coding agents

Abstract (arXiv)

How can we predict which base checkpoint is worth an expensive round of agentic post-training? End-to-end pass@K tests whether successful behavior already appears in a base model's distribution, but it is a poor fit for agentic coding: many base checkpoints cannot reliably produce the well-formed tool invocation required to complete a task end-to-end. Single-shot or short-horizon tasks avoid these tool-calling failures by collapsing a multi-step interaction into a fixed prompt and a single patch, but they sidestep the core capability we care about: maintaining coherent state over many tool-using steps as the repository evolves. To bridge this gap, we treat successful post-trained agent trajectories as a lookahead signal of base-model potential. Replaying each trajectory and rerunning tests after every code-changing step identifies the decisive step: the first step whose cumulative patch flips the repository from failing to passing, certifying that the recorded action solves the task given the prior context. Motivated by a coverage principle for agentic traces, we build three screens at this step that do not require a base checkpoint to drive the harness from a cold start: (i) Decisive-Action BPB (bits per byte) measures the probability mass on the certified action, (ii) Patch MCQ tests the checkpoint's choice between that action and alternatives rejected by the same verifier, and (iii) prefix-conditioned pass@K evaluates support for functionally-correct generations and credits any continuation that the tests accept. Across ten pairs of public base and post-trained models, all three screens rank the cohort in close agreement with post-trained SWE-bench Verified pass@1. As our methods need only a benchmark's successful trajectories and its verifier, they can be applied to turn future agentic coding benchmarks into base-model evaluations.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Agent skill learning and evolution, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 20 of its 50 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 7 Oct 2026.

Builds on

20 of 50 references.

References · 20

  1. 2021Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Codecited by 8,053
  2. 2021Program Synthesis with Large Language Modelscited by 3,509
  3. 2020The Pile: An 800GB Dataset of Diverse Text for Language Modelingcited by 2,346
  4. 2021Measuring Coding Challenge Competence With APPScited by 879
  5. 2025Kimi K2: Open Agentic Intelligencecited by 523
  6. 2026GLM-5: from Vibe Coding to Agentic Engineeringcited by 502
  7. 2025GLM-4.5: Agentic, Reasoning, and Coding (ARC) Foundation Modelscited by 446
  8. 2021Surface Form Competition: Why the Highest Probability Answer Isn't Always Rightcited by 256
  9. 2025SWE-Bench Pro: Can AI Agents Solve Long-Horizon Software Engineering Tasks?cited by 254
  10. 2026Gemma 4 Technical Reportcited by 187
  11. 2026Kimi K3: Open Frontier Intelligencecited by 99
  12. 2025The Invisible Leash: Why RLVR May or May Not Escape Its Origincited by 92
8 more
  1. 2025Nemotron 3 Nano: Open, Efficient Mixture-of-Experts Hybrid Mamba-Transformer Model for Agentic Reasoningcited by 85
  2. 2024Compression Represents Intelligence Linearlycited by 56
  3. 2026DeepSWE: Measuring Frontier Coding Agents on Original, Long-Horizon Engineering Taskscited by 41
  4. 2026Nemotron 3 Super: Open, Efficient Mixture-of-Experts Hybrid Mamba-Transformer Model for Agentic Reasoningcited by 33
  5. 2026Nemotron 3 Ultra: Open, Efficient Mixture-of-Experts Hybrid Mamba-Transformer Model for Agentic Reasoningcited by 32
  6. 2024Instruction Following without Instruction Tuningcited by 11
  7. 2025APTBench: Benchmarking Agentic Potential of Base LLMs During Pre-Trainingcited by 6
  8. 2026On Predicting the Post-training Potential of Pre-trained LLMscited by 1

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026Cross-Benchmark Transfer from RL on Agentic Coding Tasks
  2. 2026Beyond Resolution Rates: Behavioral Drivers of Coding Agent Success and Failure
  3. 2026Agent psychometrics: Task-level performance prediction in agentic coding benchmarks
  4. 2026Latent Programming Horizons in Coding Agents
  5. 2026Success Leaves Detours: Learning Executable Walkthroughs for Long-Horizon Agents
  6. 2026Learning When and How to Intervene: A Hindsight-Distilled Sentinel for Coding Agents
  7. 2026TACT: Mitigating Overthinking and Overacting in Coding Agents via Activation Steering
  8. 2026Strained Coherence: A Pre-Failure Signal in Coding Agent Execution Trajectories