arXiv subjects

Liudas Panavas

Publications and source records attributed to Liudas Panavas.

6 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

Post-Training on Office Work Improves Software Engineering: A Behavioral Account of Cross-Domain Transfer

Long-horizon tasks require agents to maintain coherent state and goals across nested and branching work. We call this capability goal-directed execution (GDE): the repeated application of four behaviors, namely selecting goals, constructing task-relevant state, maintaining fidelity to higher-level objectives, and verifying completion against the environment. We hypothesize that long-horizon post-training strengthens these behaviors across domains. We test this by post-training Qwen3.5-122B-A10B on 363 Long-Horizon Multi-Tool Agent (LHMTA) tasks drawn from office workflows. The collection contained no software-engineering tasks, yet the model's pass@1 improved by 5.8 points on SWE-Bench Pro. Matched trajectory analysis shows gains in all four GDE behaviors in both office workflows and software repositories. Aggregate SWE-Bench Pro statistics showed related changes in information gathering, implementation, and verification. Together, the results support a behavioral interpretation in which long-horizon post-training changed how the model organized and applied knowledge across tasks, with effects extending beyond the training domain.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2026

Cross-Benchmark Generalization in Long-Horizon Agents

For reinforcement learning (RL) in self-contained environments, a policy can get rewards by exploiting environment-specific regularities (tool schemas, grader parsing, task templates) rather than by acquiring transferable skill, and an in-distribution holdout shares those regularities. We argue that the discriminating question is behavioral, namely how a trained agent acts, and that cross-benchmark transfer is the right place to look for it. We post-train an open-weight mixture-of-experts model (Qwen3.5-122B-A10B) on 363 long-horizon Model Context Protocol (MCP) tasks across 27 categories, using a two-stage SFT-then-RL pipeline. Toolathlon performance informed the initial base-family and SFT-teacher choices, but no external-benchmark task or grader entered training and no external score informed the reward, training hyperparameters, trained-checkpoint selection, or stopping. At greedy pass@1, the trained model improves over the base on five reported external evaluations: Toolathlon (+9.6 pp), $\tau^2$-Bench (+5.3 pp), BFCL-V4 (+3.5 pp), SWE-Bench Pro (+5.8 pp), and Terminal-Bench 2 (+2.8 pp). Both software-engineering benchmarks improve despite the training collection containing no software-engineering tasks. An exploratory paired-trajectory analysis identifies four recurring behavioral differences (more careful local-goal formation, building goal-relevant working state, keeping parent goals stable through local repairs, and verifying completion) that appear in analogous forms across office workflows and code. These results provide descriptive evidence that long-horizon multi-tool post-training can change ways of working that transfer beyond its training domain.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2026

HANDBOOK.md: A Benchmark for Long-Context Agentic Instruction Following

Language-model agents are increasingly deployed under standing instructions: a system prompt, a policy file, or a skills document is placed in context, and the agent is trusted to let that document govern every action that follows. Existing benchmarks rarely test this deployment pattern directly; they measure whether an agent can complete a task, not whether a long, binding policy document constrains its behavior over an extended tool-use horizon. We present HANDBOOK_md, a benchmark of 65 agentic tasks modeled on how employees follow company handbooks. Each task places an agent in a self-contained company environment (a file workspace with mock email, chat, calendar, issue-tracking, and commerce services exposed over the Model Context Protocol) and instructs it to carry out routine professional work governed by an expert-written standard operating procedure of 20-124 pages. Tasks span five domains (finance, medical billing, insurance, logistics, and HR) and 10 fictional companies. To resist memorization, every task modifies one of 10 base handbooks, altering the specific rules and thresholds on which grading depends, so no two tasks share the same set of policies. Grading is fully deterministic: each task carries a rubric of programmatic criteria (824 in total) that check both that required actions occurred and that prohibited actions did not. Under strict grading, where a trial passes only if every criterion is satisfied, the strongest evaluated model passes 36.2% of trials, and most frontier models remain below 25%. Failures follow consistent patterns: agents let a plausible but unauthorized in-environment request override the standing policy, perform a required check and then act against its result, lose rule details over long horizons, and report compliance they did not achieve. We release the tasks, environments, and evaluation harness.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2026

ComplexConstraints and Beyond: Expert Rubrics for RLVR

Evaluation protocols can lag behind LLM capabilities. Programmatically verified benchmarks cover narrow surface constraints, whereas real-world instruction following and agentic workflows require judging semantic, contextual, and policy-dependent behavior. We study expert-curated rubric-based evaluation as a unified mechanism for measurement and reinforcement-learning rewards across two settings: complex instruction following and enterprise agentic tasks. We identify rubric-design choices that affect reward quality, including maximum viable atomicity, intent-aware criterion design, and LLM-judge calibration. We introduce ComplexConstraints, an expert-curated instruction-following suite comprising a public 75-prompt benchmark with 1,559 rubric criteria and a disjoint 1,000-prompt training set, with 10-40 atomic criteria per prompt. Empirically, rubric rewards improve training in both fixed task datasets, such as ComplexConstraints, and stateful RL environments, such as CoreCraft. Training a 4B model on ComplexConstraints improves mean criterion pass rate by +15.5 pp on a held-out split, bringing it within 0.5 pp of the untrained baseline of a roughly 60x larger Qwen3 model, and the gains transfer to external benchmarks the model never saw during training: +8.4 pp on AdvancedIF and +10.1 pp on MultiChallenge. In CoreCraft, rubric-reward RL likewise transfers to out-of-distribution benchmarks (+4.5 pp BFCL, +7.4 pp tau^2-Bench, +6.8 pp Toolathlon). These results show that expert-authored rubrics provide effective evaluation targets and scalable reward signals for improving LLM instruction following and agentic behavior.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2025

Set Visualizations for Comparing and Evaluating Machine Learning Models

Machine learning practitioners often need to compare multiple models to select the best one for their application. However, current methods of comparing models fall short because they rely on aggregate metrics that can be difficult to interpret or do not provide enough information to understand the differences between models. To better support the comparison of models, we propose set visualizations of model outputs to enable easier model-to-model comparison. We outline the requirements for using sets to compare machine learning models and demonstrate how this approach can be applied to various machine learning tasks. We also introduce SetMLVis, an interactive system that utilizes set visualizations to compare object detection models. Our evaluation shows that SetMLVis outperforms traditional visualization techniques in terms of task completion and reduces cognitive workload for users. Supplemental materials can be found at https://osf.io/afksu/?view_only=bb7f259426ad425f81d0518a38c597be.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2024

But Can You Use It? Design Recommendations for Differentially Private Interactive Systems

Accessing data collected by federal statistical agencies is essential for public policy research and improving evidence-based decision making, such as evaluating the effectiveness of social programs, understanding demographic shifts, or addressing public health challenges. Differentially private interactive systems, or validation servers, can form a crucial part of the data-sharing infrastructure. They may allow researchers to query targeted statistics, providing flexible, efficient access to specific insights, reducing the need for broad data releases and supporting timely, focused research. However, they have not yet been practically implemented. While substantial theoretical work has been conducted on the privacy and accuracy guarantees of differentially private mechanisms, prior efforts have not considered usability as an explicit goal of interactive systems. This work outlines and considers the barriers to developing differentially private interactive systems for informing public policy and offers an alternative way forward. We propose balancing three design considerations: privacy assurance, statistical utility, and system usability, we develop recommendations for making differentially private interactive systems work in practice, we present an example architecture based on these recommendations, and we provide an outline of how to conduct the necessary user-testing. Our work seeks to move the practical development of differentially private interactive systems forward to better aid public policy making and spark future research.

cs.HC↗