Searcharxiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2606.03889

RealClawBench: Live OpenClaw Benchmarks from Real Developer-Agent Sessions

Zongwei Lv·Yaoming Li·Zhewen Tan·Yilun Yao·Yuxuan Tian·Lin Sun·Xiangzheng Zhang·Weihong Lin·Tong Yang·Guangxiang Zhao
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Agent benchmarks should reflect what users actually ask deployed agents to do, yet existing benchmarks often miss key realism properties of real developer-agent sessions. We introduce RealClawBench, a live benchmark framework built from real OpenClaw sessions to capture the distribution, diversity, and real-world difficulty of deployed agent use. Real user requests are challenging to benchmark because they often depend on local execution environments, involve implicit or underspecified intent, and require nontrivial verification. RealClawBench addresses these challenges with two core mechanisms: reconstructed execution environments and deterministic verifiable scorers, which together convert real sessions into reproducible, automatically scored tasks. The resulting release contains 281 executable tasks sampled from a much larger real-session pool while preserving the source distribution, with maximum final-vs-source Jensen-Shannon divergence of 0.0448. Evaluating 14 contemporary models shows that the best system solves only 65.8% of tasks, revealing substantial headroom on realistic developer-agent workloads. By turning real deployed sessions into controlled evaluation instances, RealClawBench provides a practical path toward benchmarks that better measure agent capability in actual use. Code is available at:https://anonymous.4open.science/r/real-claw-bench-582B.

Explore related subjects

cs.CL

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Zongwei Lv, Yaoming Li, Zhewen Tan, Yilun Yao, Yuxuan Tian, Lin Sun, Xiangzheng Zhang, Weihong Lin, Tong Yang, Guangxiang Zhao. 2026-08-28. RealClawBench: Live OpenClaw Benchmarks from Real Developer-Agent Sessions. https://arxiv.org/abs/2606.03889

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

Discover connections

cs.CL subject

Connections use source metadata and explicit phrase matches, not verified experimental comparisons.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related discoveries

arXiv2026

Informational Antilocality and the Locality Bias in LLMs

We consider the ability of transformer-based language models (LLMs) to learn what we call k-antilocal languages, i.e., languages that have no mutual information across any span of $k$ contiguous symbols. We construct such languages with increasing $k$, finding that LLMs trained on them achieve comparable cross-entropy loss regardless of antilocality, but converge more slowly on more antilocal languages. Our findings support the idea that non-local dependencies are more difficult to learn, but the evidence for this bias comes from learning speed rather than learning success.

cs.CL↗
arXiv2026

Sleight of Word Benchmark: Can Language Models Notice If Their Own Output Was Tampered With?

The output of a Language Model can be tampered with \emph{while} the model is writing it. A simple test can thus be constructed by evaluating the model's perception of this external perturbation. In this spirit, a simple benchmark is built in which a single word is consistently substituted with another in the generation process. We call this method \emph{Sleight of Word}. Two distinct axes are measured: metrics that relate to the model's surprise, as well as an evaluation of the textual reaction for 19 different open-weight language models.

cs.CL↗
arXiv2026

Do LLM Agents Mirror Socio-Cognitive Effects in Power-Asymmetric Conversations?

Power differences shape human communication through well documented socio cognitive effects, including language coordination, pronoun usage, authority bias, and harmful compliance. We examine whether large language models (LLMs) exhibit similar behaviors when assigned high or low status personas. Using personas from diverse professions, we simulate multi turn, power asymmetric dialogues (e.g., principal teacher, justice lawyer) and measure (i) language coordination, (ii) pronoun usage, (iii) persuasion success, and (iv) compliance with unsafe requests. Our results show that LLMs show key socio-cognitive effects of power, albeit with nuances and variability, linking simulated interactions to both desirable and unsafe behaviors.

cs.CL↗