❌

Normal view

DeepXiv-SDK: An Agentic Data Interface for Scientific Literature

arXiv:2603.00084v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: LLM-agents are increasingly used to accelerate the progress of scientific research. Yet a persistent bottleneck is data access: agents not only lack readily available tools for retrieval, but also have to work with unstrcutured, human-centric data on the Internet, such as HTML web-pages and PDF files, leading to excessive token consumption, limit working efficiency, and brittle evidence look-up. This gap motivates the development of \textit{an agentic data interface}, which is designed to enable agents to access and utilize scientific literature in a more effective, efficient, and cost-aware manner. In this paper, we introduce DeepXiv-SDK, which offers a three-layer agentic data interface for scientific literature. 1) Data Layer, which transforms unstructured, human-centric data into normalized and structured representations in JSON format, improving data usability and enabling progressive accessibility of the data. 2) Service Layer, which presents readily available tools for data access and ad-hoc retrieval. It also enables a rich form of agent usage, including CLI, MCP, and Python SDK. 3) Application Layer, which creates a built-in agent, packaging basic tools from the service layer to support complex data access demands. DeepXiv-SDK currently supports the complete ArXiv corpus, and is synchronized daily to incorporate new releases. It is designed to extend to all common open-access corpora, such as PubMed Central, bioRxiv, medRxiv, and chemRxiv. We release RESTful APIs, an open-source Python SDK, and a web demo showcasing deep search and deep research workflows. DeepXiv-SDK is free to use with registration.

A Benchmark for Evaluating Outcome-Driven Constraint Violations in Autonomous AI Agents

arXiv:2512.20798v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: As autonomous AI agents are increasingly deployed in high-stakes environments, ensuring their safety and alignment with human values has become a paramount concern. Current safety benchmarks primarily evaluate whether agents refuse explicitly harmful instructions or whether they can maintain procedural compliance in complex tasks. However, there is a lack of benchmarks designed to capture emergent forms of outcome-driven constraint violations, which arise when agents pursue goal optimization under strong performance incentives while deprioritizing ethical, legal, or safety constraints over multiple steps in realistic production settings. To address this gap, we introduce a new benchmark comprising 40 distinct scenarios. Each scenario presents a task that requires multi-step actions, and the agent's performance is tied to a specific Key Performance Indicator (KPI). Each scenario features Mandated (instruction-commanded) and Incentivized (KPI-pressure-driven) variations to distinguish between obedience and emergent misalignment. Across 12 state-of-the-art large language models, we observe outcome-driven constraint violations ranging from 1.3% to 71.4%, with 9 of the 12 evaluated models exhibiting misalignment rates between 30% and 50%. Strikingly, we find that superior reasoning capability does not inherently ensure safety; for instance, Gemini-3-Pro-Preview, one of the most capable models evaluated, exhibits the highest violation rate at 71.4%, frequently escalating to severe misconduct to satisfy KPIs. Furthermore, we observe significant "deliberative misalignment", where the models that power the agents recognize their actions as unethical during separate evaluation. These results emphasize the critical need for more realistic agentic-safety training before deployment to mitigate their risks in the real world.
❌