Skip to content

CoArena: Evaluating Computer-Use and Multi-Agent Systems in Real Time

Sep 2026 · 0 citations · 35 references
Computer Science

TL;DR

This work defines real-time as five measurable properties, each with an equation and a worked example: continuous task arrival, live concurrent execution, online rating updates, freshness with contamination resistance, and bounded feedback latency from a failed run to a reusable training environment.

Abstract

Static benchmarks for computer-use agents fix a task set at release and score every system against it once. That makes them reproducible, and it lets them drift from what they should measure: a fixed task set ages, leaks into training corpora, and cannot follow how people actually use agents from week to week. CoArena measures use directly. Real users submit tasks; two systems, each a single model or a multi-agent pipeline behind the same tool interface, execute the same task concurrently in identical sandboxed desktops; users judge the two outcomes without knowing which system produced them; and a public leaderboard is refit from those judgments. The central contribution is a formal account of what makes such an evaluation real-time. We define real-time as five measurable properties, each with an equation and a worked example: continuous task arrival, live concurrent execution, online rating updates, freshness with contamination resistance, and bounded feedback latency from a failed run to a reusable training environment. The rating methodology follows in full: the Bradley-Terry pairwise model, its likelihood with weighted observations and ties, the penalized maximum-likelihood estimator, and the streaming update applied when a single vote arrives (a stochastic-gradient step on the same likelihood, recovering Elo). It gives confidence intervals from the observed information and a cluster-robust sandwich, rank bands from a parametric bootstrap, the rule by which a new system enters the board, and the convergence rate of the estimate. Vote quality is treated with inter-judge agreement statistics, redundant judging, and explicit handling of ties and abstentions. A five-system example with 211 votes is carried from the vote matrix to ratings, intervals, and rank bands. Every number is derived from stated inputs or labeled illustrative; none is a measurement of a deployed system.

View source

Similar papers

#artificial intelligence Preprint Oct 2026

Agents Are Systems, Not Models: Rethinking Agentic Evaluation

Agent evaluations increasingly go beyond a single success rate, reporting metrics such as cost, consistency, and robustness. Yet they typically treat the agent itself as fixed. In practice, an agent is a configurable system: users decide what to tell it, how long to let it run, and which model to use, and each of these...

Luis Wiedmann, Leander Girrbach, Cordelia Schmid et al. · 0 citations
Preprint Aug 2026

SIR: Self-improving Red-teaming for Compute Use Agents

Computer-use agents (CUAs) are agents powered by vision-language models (VLMs) that perceive a screen and operate an operating system through mouse, keyboard, and terminal interactions to automate everyday digital tasks. Their exposure to untrusted content creates a risk of indirect prompt injection (IPI), where an adv...

Chen Xiong, Zhi-Yuan He, Pin-Yu Chen et al. · 0 citations
Preprint Aug 2026

Multi-Agent AI Safety as an Institutional Design Problem

This is the first paper from POLIS, an ongoing research programme studying algorithmic institutions for multi-agent systems, and asks which parts of an AI institution produce safety and how they do it.

X. Abdullah · 1 citation
Preprint Aug 2026

VibeLifeBench: Can Your Life Agent Be Proactive and Persistent in a Living World?

This work introduces VibeLifeBench, a benchmark of 200 long-horizon tasks across ten everyday-life domains, and evaluates seven frontier models, all of which score low, which shows how far current agents are from assisting with real life.

Xiaohongshu Dots Studio, AI Evolvent · 1 citation
#artificial intelligence Preprint Sep 2026

Testing Interchangeability in LLM Agent Teams

Production multi-agent systems replace agents constantly, on the assumption that an agent filling a role is interchangeable with any other agent that can do the job, and agents are more fungible in task outcome than in coordination efficiency, with larger swap effects after longer formation histories.

Jian-Xi Gao, Tian-Yi Yu, Lin-Na Deng et al. · 1 citation

Related blog posts

MIT News · Artificial Intelligence Oct 7, 2026

Discovering the value of humanistic inquiry

Students in MIT’s Concourse program delve deeply into the human condition, debate challenging questions, and learn to develop judgment about issues that can’t be quantified.

Microsoft Research Blog Oct 7, 2026

Agent Lightning v1.0: A 3,500-Line Lightweight Agentic RL Framework for Training Agents with Real Harnesses

Training AI agents with reinforcement learning can be challenging because their tools, context, and decision-making are managed by complex frameworks. Agent Lightning connects existing agents to RL training, making it easier to improve them without rebuilding them. The post Agent Lightning v1.0: A 3,500-Line Lightweight Agentic RL Framework for Training Agents with Real Harnesses appeared first on Microsoft Research.

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.