Agentic Harness Engineering: Observability-Driven Automatic Evolution of Coding-Agent Harnesses

Harnesses have become a central determinant of coding-agent performance, shaping how models interact with repositories, tools, and execution environments. Yet automating harness engineering is hard: a heterogeneous action space, sparse and noisy evaluation signal, multi-million-token trajectories, and edits whose effect is hard to attribute to the next round's outcomes. We introduce Agentic Harness Engineering (AHE), a framework that automates harness-level evolution by instrumenting the three stages of any engineering loop (component editing, trajectory inspection, and decision making) with matched observability pillars: (1) component observability gives every editable harness component a file-level representation so the action space is explicit and revertible; (2) experience observability distills millions of raw trajectory tokens into a layered, drill-down evidence corpus that an evolving agent can actually consume; and (3) decision observability pairs every edit with a self-declared prediction, later verified against the next round's task-level outcomes. Together, these pillars turn every edit into a falsifiable contract, so harness evolution proceeds autonomously without collapsing into trial-and-error. Empirically, ten AHE iterations lift pass@1 on Terminal-Bench 2 from 69.7% to 77.0%, surpassing the human-designed harness Codex-CLI (71.9%) and the self-evolving baselines ACE and TF-GRPO. The frozen harness transfers without re-evolution: on SWE-bench-verified it tops aggregate success at 12% fewer tokens than the seed, and on Terminal-Bench 2 it yields +5.1 to +10.1pp cross-family gains across three alternate model families, indicating the evolved components encode general engineering experience rather than benchmark-specific tuning. These results position observability-driven evolution as a practical pathway to keep coding-agent harnesses continually improving.

Beyond Rating: A Comprehensive Evaluation and Benchmark for AI Reviews

The rapid adoption of Large Language Models (LLMs) has spurred interest in automated peer review; however, progress is currently stifled by benchmarks that treat reviewing primarily as a rating prediction task. We argue that the utility of a review lies in its textual justification--its arguments, questions, and critique--rather than a scalar score. To address this, we introduce Beyond Rating, a holistic evaluation framework that assesses AI reviewers across five dimensions: Content Faithfulness, Argumentative Alignment, Focus Consistency, Question Constructiveness, and AI-Likelihood. Notably, we propose a Max-Recall strategy to accommodate valid expert disagreement and introduce a curated dataset of paper with high-confidence reviews, rigorously filtered to remove procedural noise. Extensive experiments demonstrate that while traditional n-gram metrics fail to reflect human preferences, our proposed text-centric metrics--particularly the recall of weakness arguments--correlate strongly with rating accuracy. These findings establish that aligning AI critique focus with human experts is a prerequisite for reliable automated scoring, offering a robust standard for future research.

EVPO: Explained Variance Policy Optimization for Adaptive Critic Utilization in LLM Post-Training

Reinforcement learning (RL) for LLM post-training faces a fundamental design choice: whether to use a learned critic as a baseline for policy optimization. Classical theory favors critic-based methods such as PPO for variance reduction, yet critic-free alternatives like GRPO have gained widespread adoption due to their simplicity and competitive performance. We show that in sparse-reward settings, a learned critic can inject estimation noise that exceeds the state signal it captures, increasing rather than reducing advantage variance. By casting baseline selection as a Kalman filtering problem, we unify PPO and GRPO as two extremes of the Kalman gain and prove that explained variance (EV), computable from a single training batch, identifies the exact boundary: positive EV indicates the critic reduces variance, while zero or negative EV signals that it inflates variance. Building on this insight, we propose Explained Variance Policy Optimization (EVPO), which monitors batch-level EV at each training step and adaptively switches between critic-based and batch-mean advantage estimation, provably achieving no greater variance than the better of the two at every step. Across four tasks spanning classical control, agentic interaction, and mathematical reasoning, EVPO consistently outperforms both PPO and GRPO regardless of which fixed baseline is stronger on a given task. Further analysis confirms that the adaptive gating tracks critic maturation over training and that the theoretically derived zero threshold is empirically optimal.

Reward Hacking in the Era of Large Models: Mechanisms, Emergent Misalignment, Challenges

Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) and related alignment paradigms have become central to steering large language models (LLMs) and multimodal large language models (MLLMs) toward human-preferred behaviors. However, these approaches introduce a systemic vulnerability: reward hacking, where models exploit imperfections in learned reward signals to maximize proxy objectives without fulfilling true task intent. As models scale and optimization intensifies, such exploitation manifests as verbosity bias, sycophancy, hallucinated justification, benchmark overfitting, and, in multimodal settings, perception--reasoning decoupling and evaluator manipulation. Recent evidence further suggests that seemingly benign shortcut behaviors can generalize into broader forms of misalignment, including deception and strategic gaming of oversight mechanisms. In this survey, we propose the Proxy Compression Hypothesis (PCH) as a unifying framework for understanding reward hacking. We formalize reward hacking as an emergent consequence of optimizing expressive policies against compressed reward representations of high-dimensional human objectives. Under this view, reward hacking arises from the interaction of objective compression, optimization amplification, and evaluator--policy co-adaptation. This perspective unifies empirical phenomena across RLHF, RLAIF, and RLVR regimes, and explains how local shortcut learning can generalize into broader forms of misalignment, including deception and strategic manipulation of oversight mechanisms. We further organize detection and mitigation strategies according to how they intervene on compression, amplification, or co-adaptation dynamics. By framing reward hacking as a structural instability of proxy-based alignment under scale, we highlight open challenges in scalable oversight, multimodal grounding, and agentic autonomy.

MM-Doc-R1: Training Agents for Long Document Visual Question Answering through Multi-turn Reinforcement Learning

Conventional Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) systems often struggle with complex multi-hop queries over long documents due to their single-pass retrieval. We introduce MM-Doc-R1, a novel framework that employs an agentic, vision-aware workflow to address long document visual question answering through iterative information discovery and synthesis. To incentivize the information seeking capabilities of our agents, we propose Similarity-based Policy Optimization (SPO), addressing baseline estimation bias in existing multi-turn reinforcement learning (RL) algorithms like GRPO. Our core insight is that in multi-turn RL, the more semantically similar two trajectories are, the more accurate their shared baseline estimation becomes. Leveraging this, SPO calculates a more precise baseline by similarity-weighted averaging of rewards across multiple trajectories, unlike GRPO which inappropriately applies the initial state's baseline to all intermediate states. This provides a more stable and accurate learning signal for our agents, leading to superior training performance that surpasses GRPO. Our experiments on the MMLongbench-Doc benchmark show that MM-Doc-R1 outperforms previous baselines by 10.4%. Furthermore, SPO demonstrates superior performance over GRPO, boosting results by 5.0% with Qwen3-8B and 6.1% with Qwen3-4B. These results highlight the effectiveness of our integrated framework and novel training algorithm in advancing the state-of-the-art for complex, long-document visual question answering.

Steering the Verifiability of Multimodal AI Hallucinations

AI applications driven by multimodal large language models (MLLMs) are prone to hallucinations and pose considerable risks to human users. Crucially, such hallucinations are not equally problematic: some hallucination contents could be detected by human users(i.e., obvious hallucinations), while others are often missed or require more verification effort(i.e., elusive hallucinations). This indicates that multimodal AI hallucinations vary significantly in their verifiability. Yet, little research has explored how to control this property for AI applications with diverse security and usability demands. To address this gap, we construct a dataset from 4,470 human responses to AI-generated hallucinations and categorize these hallucinations into obvious and elusive types based on their verifiability by human users. Further, we propose an activation-space intervention method that learns separate probes for obvious and elusive hallucinations. We reveal that obvious and elusive hallucinations elicit different intervention probes, allowing for fine-grained control over the model's verifiability. Empirical results demonstrate the efficacy of this approach and show that targeted interventions yield superior performance in regulating corresponding verifiability. Moreover, simply mixing these interventions enables flexible control over the verifiability required for different scenarios.

Beyond Attention Magnitude: Leveraging Inter-layer Rank Consistency for Efficient Vision-Language-Action Models

Vision-Language-Action (VLA) models excel in robotic manipulation but suffer from significant inference latency due to processing dense visual tokens. Existing token reduction methods predominantly rely on attention magnitude as a static selection. In this work, we challenge this assumption, revealing that high-attention tokens are task-dependent and can even degrade policy performance. To address this, we introduce \textbf{TIES} (\textbf{T}au-guided \textbf{I}nter-layer \textbf{E}fficient \textbf{S}election), a dynamic framework guided by inter-layer token ranking consistency. By adaptively balancing attention magnitude with ranking consistency, TIES ensures robust token selection without requiring additional training. On the CogACT + SIMPLER benchmark, TIES improves average success rates by 6\% while reducing token usage by 78\%, and demonstrate strong generalization across diverse decoders and benchmarks.

FinToolSyn: A forward synthesis Framework for Financial Tool-Use Dialogue Data with Dynamic Tool Retrieval

Tool-use capabilities are vital for Large Language Models (LLMs) in finance, a domain characterized by massive investment targets and data-intensive inquiries. However, existing data synthesis methods typically rely on a reverse synthesis paradigm, generating user queries from pre-sampled tools. This approach inevitably introduces artificial explicitness, yielding queries that fail to capture the implicit, event-driven nature of real-world needs. Moreover, its reliance on static tool sets overlooks the dynamic retrieval process required to navigate massive tool spaces. To address these challenges, we introduce \textit{FinToolSyn}, a forward synthesis framework designed to generate high-quality financial dialogues. Progressing from persona instruction and atomic tool synthesis to dynamic retrieval dialogue generation, our pipeline constructs a repository of 43,066 tools and synthesizes over 148k dialogue instances, incorporating dynamic retrieval to emulate the noisy candidate sets typical of massive tool spaces. We also establish a dedicated benchmark to evaluate tool-calling capabilities in realistic financial scenarios. Extensive experiments demonstrate that models trained on FinToolSyn achieve a 21.06\% improvement, providing a robust foundation for tool learning in financial scenarios.

JFTA-Bench: Evaluate LLM's Ability of Tracking and Analyzing Malfunctions Using Fault Trees

In the maintenance of complex systems, fault trees are used to locate problems and provide targeted solutions. To enable fault trees stored as images to be directly processed by large language models, which can assist in tracking and analyzing malfunctions, we propose a novel textual representation of fault trees. Building on it, we construct a benchmark for multi-turn dialogue systems that emphasizes robust interaction in complex environments, evaluating a model's ability to assist in malfunction localization, which contains $3130$ entries and $40.75$ turns per entry on average. We train an end-to-end model to generate vague information to reflect user behavior and introduce long-range rollback and recovery procedures to simulate user error scenarios, enabling assessment of a model's integrated capabilities in task tracking and error recovery, and Gemini 2.5 pro archives the best performance.

CCTU: A Benchmark for Tool Use under Complex Constraints

Solving problems through tool use under explicit constraints constitutes a highly challenging yet unavoidable scenario for large language models (LLMs), requiring capabilities such as function calling, instruction following, and self-refinement. However, progress has been hindered by the absence of dedicated evaluations. To address this, we introduce CCTU, a benchmark for evaluating LLM tool use under complex constraints. CCTU is grounded in a taxonomy of 12 constraint categories spanning four dimensions (i.e., resource, behavior, toolset, and response). The benchmark comprises 200 carefully curated and challenging test cases across diverse tool-use scenarios, each involving an average of seven constraint types and an average prompt length exceeding 4,700 tokens. To enable reliable evaluation, we develop an executable constraint validation module that performs step-level validation and enforces compliance during multi-turn interactions between models and their environments. We evaluate nine state-of-the-art LLMs in both thinking and non-thinking modes. Results indicate that when strict adherence to all constraints is required, no model achieves a task completion rate above 20%. Further analysis reveals that models violate constraints in over 50% of cases, particularly in the resource and response dimensions. Moreover, LLMs demonstrate limited capacity for self-refinement even after receiving detailed feedback on constraint violations, highlighting a critical bottleneck in the development of robust tool-use agents. To facilitate future research, we release the data and code.