Skip to content

Messier: A High-Resolution Corpus for Cross-Benchmark Agent Evaluation

Jul 2026 · arXiv.org · Vol abs/2607.25891 · 0 citations · 63 references
Computer Science

TL;DR

MESSIER, a unified corpus of 957,611 records spanning 30 benchmarks, 745 agents, 11,891 tasks, and 74,263 verifiers, is introduced, a reusable resource for studying agent performance at scale, and a basis for designing better evaluations.

Abstract

Comprehensively evaluating AI agents across interactive environments is difficult due to fragmented tasks, scaffolds, verifiers, and scoring rules. Unfortunately, existing efforts to unify these evaluations are limited in scale and domain, making costly reruns necessary and leaving available data incomparable. We introduce MESSIER, a unified corpus of 957,611 records spanning 30 benchmarks, 745 agents, 11,891 tasks, and 74,263 verifiers. MESSIER combines public evaluation results with new runs on six underrepresented professional and scientific benchmarks, standardizing their heterogeneous components into a common schema. Using this corpus, we show that frontier progress is uneven across benchmark groups, with function-calling evaluations largely saturated, programming improving fastest, and enterprise workflows remaining most challenging. Counterfactual rescoring further shows that strict all-pass scoring in multi-verifier tasks can alter agent rankings. Finally, we derive capability scores from our corpus that correlate with Epoch's Evaluation Capability Index rankings at Spearman \r{ho} = 0.84. The scores can also be estimated for subsets defined by domain, occupation, action space, or verifier type. In essence, MESSIER is a reusable resource for studying agent performance at scale, and a basis for designing better evaluations.

View source

Similar papers

Jul 2026

How Benchmarks Mis-Score Computer-Use Agents

A three-tier diagnostic taxonomy shows that verification/feedback and planning failures dominate execution/grounding errors, while a single scalar success rate can not explain, and connects these findings to newer long-horizon CUA benchmarks and derive stage-specific design rules for CUA evaluation.

Zi-Han Dong, Zhiyuan Ma, Zekun Wang et al. · 2 citations
Preprint Aug 2026

AgentJudgeBench: A Multi-Difficulty Benchmark for Evaluating LLM Judges on Agentic Tool-Calling

The first benchmark to systematically study LLM-as-a-judge reliability for agentic tool-calling over workflow DAGs, as distinct from the broader LLM-as-a-judge task of open-ended text or preference evaluation, exposes fundamental limitations of current LLM judges and yields practical guidelines for reliable evaluation...

Abhigya Verma, Amit Kumar Saha, Seganrasan Subramanian et al. · 1 citation · ⚡1
#artificial intelligence Preprint Aug 2026

K-Bench: measuring model performance on real scientific agent requests

K-Bench 01, an evaluation built from first-turn requests sampled from live user traffic on K-Dense Web and run end to end by nine frontier models in identical sandboxes, yielding 1,602 completed agent runs is reported, arguing that the informative quantity for scientific agents is not a leaderboard position but the joi...

Aubrey M. Brueckner, Darshil Patel, Yu-Huan He et al. · 2 citations
Jul 2026

Do Agent Benchmarks Measure Capability? Protocol Validity in the Age of Agentic AI

Agent benchmarks increasingly evaluate repository editing, web research, terminal use, and long-horizon interaction. Their scores support capability claims only when the evaluation protocol keeps the intended capability necessary for success. Recent reward-hacking benchmarks and system reports show that agents can inst...

Jia-Qi Shao, Hanck Chen, Wei Zhang et al. · 4 citations
Jul 2026

ClawTrack: Towards Trace-Level Evaluation and Improvement of Real-World Autonomous Agents

ClawTrack is presented, a dual-assessment benchmark that simultaneously measures what an agent achieves (Task Score) and how it achieves it (Process Score) and finds that process scores effectively attribute success and failure to specific reasoning dimensions, filtering lucky passes invisible to outcome-only evaluatio...

Xingjian Wu, Xuhan Zhu, Xing-Chen Liu et al. · 0 citations
#artificial intelligence Review Aug 2026

What Makes Software Issue Resolution Tasks Difficult for Agents?

Background. Advances in agentic systems are simultaneously, and rapidly, saturating benchmarks. Despite this often discussed phenomena, benchmark scores remain difficult to interpret due to the lack of control and characterization of task difficulty. More specifically, we currently have little understanding of what mak...

Ebtesam Al-Haque, Brittany Johnson · 0 citations

Related blog posts

Hugging Face Blog Oct 20, 2026

MPS in PyTorch 2.15

We’re on a journey to advance and democratize artificial intelligence through open source and open science.

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