Searcharxiv⌕ Search

arXiv · 2610.36589

InfraDev: Can Coding Agents Develop AI Infrastructure, and How Can We Tell?

Abstract

Coding agents are beginning to develop the production-grade AI infrastructure that trains and serves large models, yet existing benchmarks cover only single kernels or single-GPU tasks, and grade with tests and prompts that misjudge both correct and incorrect patches. We introduce InfraDev, a benchmark of 36 tasks built from real-world pull requests to Megatron-LM, vLLM, and verl, covering infrastructure development for training, inference, and reinforcement learning. Each task asks an agent to reimplement a real change that spans many files and must run correctly across many GPUs. To grade such changes, we jointly synthesize hidden probes, which enforce the requirements the original tests leave unchecked, and a prompt that states every interface the probes call without revealing the solution. We also design a shared execution environment that reuses dependencies and artifacts across tasks, cutting storage by 52-57% and build time by 13-14% on Megatron-LM and vLLM. Across six frontier models, the best resolves only 38.9% of the tasks; the probes reject 32% of the submissions that pass every official test, and with the original pull request descriptions as prompts, no model resolves a single task. Failure analysis shows that structural and state errors dominate and that agents' own tests rarely check memory, time, or traffic. Turning these findings into an agent skill raises the resolved rate of a frontier model on the Megatron-LM tasks by 10.5%.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Yangshen Deng, Jiaqi Ruan, Yeqi Huang, Nick Lau, Guangming Sheng, Luo Mai. 2026-10-27. InfraDev: Can Coding Agents Develop AI Infrastructure, and How Can We Tell?. https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.36589

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Epsilon-Identifiability of Causal Quantities

Identifying the effects of causes and causes of effects is vital in virtually every scientific field. Often, however, the needed probabilities may not be fully identifiable from the available data sources. This paper shows how approximate identifiability is still possible for several probabilities of causation. We term this epsilon-identifiability and demonstrate its usefulness in cases where the behavior of certain subpopulations can be restricted within sufficiently narrow bounds. In particular, we show how unidentifiable causal effects and counterfactual probabilities can be epsilon-identified when such allowances are made. Often, these allowances are easily measured and reasonably assumed. Finally, epsilon-identifiability is applied to the unit selection problem.

cs.AI↗

PIVOT: Bridging Planning and Execution in LLM Agents via Trajectory Refinement

Large language model (LLM)-based agents frequently generate seemingly coherent plans that fail upon execution due to infeasible actions, constraint violations, and compounding errors over extended horizons. PIVOT (Plan-Inspect-eVOlve Trajectories) addresses this plan-execution misalignment through a self-supervised framework that treats trajectories as optimizable objects iteratively refined via environment interaction. The framework comprises four stages: PLAN generates candidate trajectories; INSPECT executes them and computes structured losses with textual gradients encoding plan-execution discrepancies; EVOLVE applies these signals to produce improved trajectories; and VERIFY performs a final global check against task constraints. A monotonic acceptance process ensures a non-decreasing solution quality. Empirical evaluations on DeepPlanning and GAIA demonstrate state-of-the-art performance: with human-in-the-loop (HITL) feedback, PIVOT establishes a strong upper bound up to 94% relative improvement in constraint satisfaction, while its fully autonomous variant retains substantial gains, showing that the core trajectory-refinement mechanism remains effective without external supervision. At the same time, PIVOT remains computationally efficient, requiring up to 3x to 5x fewer tokens than competing refinement methods. These findings establish that (self- or human-supervised) feedback-based trajectory optimization is a principled methodology for mitigating plan-execution gaps in autonomous agent systems.

cs.AI↗

Hedge-Bench: Benchmarking Agents on Hard, Realistic Tasks Pertaining to Financial Reasoning

Modern AI agents are increasingly capable of routine financial-analysis tasks such as retrieving documents and updating spreadsheets. A harder challenge is forecasting an unknown future from incomplete information. Public markets provide a natural testbed: analysts routinely predict discrete events with information from that point in time. We present Hedge-Bench, a benchmark of 92 real-world environments derived from hedge fund analysts' reasoning traces paired with subsequently resolved prediction questions. Agents reason from frozen information snapshots, and their forecasts are evaluated against real-world outcomes. Across 11 frontier models and three trials per environment, joint success rates, which require both a correct forecast and over 60% research coverage, range from 2.54 to 31.52%. Using GRPO with turn-level credit assignment, we train Muse-Glimmer on 165 environments, increasing coverage on 22 held-out environments from 17.17% to 33.36% at low reasoning effort and from 30.19% to 47.02% at extra-high effort. The trained model at low effort also exceeds the base model's extra-high-effort coverage while using 47.9% fewer tokens. We also observe evidence of generalization: held-out forecasting accuracy at high effort improves by 10.06 percentage points, while out-of-distribution evaluation scores improve by 3.94 points on GDPval, 2.29 on GDP.pdf, 7.07 on Harvey LAB, and 4.96 on Frontier Finance under their respective metrics. Code: https://github.com/Trata-Inc/trata-hedge-bench-verified.

cs.AI↗