Where Do Deep-Research Agents Go Wrong? Span-Level Error Localization in Agent Trajectories
Deep-research agents solve tasks through long trajectories of search, tool use, evidence inspection, and answer synthesis. Evaluation based on final answers shows whether an agent succeeds, but not which parts of the trajectory make the answer unreliable. We study span-level error localization for deep-research agents. We collect 2,790 real trajectories from two agent frameworks, three backbone models, and three benchmarks, convert raw logs into semantic spans, and annotate harmful error spans through LLM-assisted expert review. From these annotations, we build TELBench, a 1,000-instance benchmark for identifying error spans among normal exploration, failed searches, tentative hypotheses, and harmless noise. We further propose DRIFT, a claim-centric auditing framework that tracks agent claims, checks their support in trajectory evidence, and marks spans where unsupported or conflicting claims affect the answer path. Experiments across model families and auditing frameworks show that DRIFT improves span-level error localization and first-error accuracy by up to 30 percentage points. Our work provides a process-level view of reliability in deep-research agents.
Code (0)
등록된 구현이 없습니다.
Similar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
EconEvals: Benchmarks and Litmus Tests for LLM Agents in Unknown Environments
We develop benchmarks for LLM agents that act in, learn from, and strategize in unknown environments, the specifications of which the LLM agent must learn over time from deliberate exploration. Our benchmarks consist of …
Decision MakingSchedulingYour Agents Are Aging Too: Agent Lifespan Engineering for Deployed Systems
Long-lived AI agents are increasingly deployed as persistent operational systems, yet they are still evaluated like freshly initialized models. Day-one benchmarks miss a basic systems question: how long does an agent rem…
No Answer is Better Than Wrong Answer: A Reflection Model for Document Level Machine Reading Comprehension
The Natural Questions (NQ) benchmark set brings new challenges to Machine Reading Comprehension: the answers are not only at different levels of granularity (long and short), but also of richer types (including no-answer…
Machine Reading ComprehensionNatural QuestionsReading ComprehensionOpenBioRQ: Unsolved Biomedical Research Questions for Agents
A working citation looks like proof -- but the fact that a link resolves does not mean the cited paper supports the claim. I find that current agentic models rarely fabricate citations (over $99\%$ resolve), yet roughly …
SGR-Bench: Benchmarking Search Agents on State-Gated Retrieval
Recent advances in large language models and tool-using agents have expanded the range of benchmarked web tasks. Yet an important class of specialized retrieval tasks remains undercharacterized. On many specialized data-…