arXiv:2604.04651v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Agents equipped with search tools have emerged as effective solutions for knowledge-intensive tasks. While Large Language Models (LLMs) exhibit strong reasoning capabilities, their high computational cost limits practical deployment for search agents. Consequently, recent work has focused on distilling agentic behaviors from LLMs into Small Language Models (SLMs). Through comprehensive evaluation on complex multi-hop reasoning tasks, we find that despite possessing less parametric knowledge, SLMs invoke search tools less frequently and are more prone to hallucinations. To address this issue, we propose \policy, a lightweight fine-tuning approach that explicitly trains SLMs to reliably retrieve and generate answers grounded in retrieved evidence. Compared to agent distillation from LLMs, our approach improves performance by 17.3 scores on Bamboogle and 15.3 scores on HotpotQA, achieving LLM-level results across benchmarks. Our further analysis reveals that adaptive search strategies in SLMs often degrade performance, highlighting the necessity of consistent search behavior for reliable reasoning.

arXiv:2512.13168v4 Announce Type: replace Abstract: We introduce FinWorkBench (a.k.a. Finch), a benchmark for evaluating agents on real-world, enterprise-grade finance and accounting workflows that interleave data entry, structuring, formatting, web search, cross-file retrieval, calculation, modeling, validation, translation, visualization, and reporting. Finch is built from authentic enterprise workspaces from Enron (15,000 files and 500,000 emails) and other financial institutions spanning 2000 to 2025, preserving the in-the-wild messiness of multimodal artifacts such as tables and charts across diverse domains including budgeting, trading, and asset management. We propose a workflow construction process that combines LLM-assisted mining of workflows from authentic enterprise environments with expert annotation. Specifically, we use LLM-assisted, expert-verified derivation of workflows from real-world email threads and spreadsheet version histories, followed by meticulous workflow annotation requiring more than 700 hours of expert effort. This process yields 172 composite workflows with 384 tasks, involving 1,710 spreadsheets with 27 million cells, along with PDFs and other artifacts, capturing the intrinsically messy, long-horizon, knowledge-intensive, and collaborative nature of enterprise work. We conduct both human and automated evaluations of frontier AI systems, including GPT 5.1, Claude Sonnet/Opus 4.5, Gemini 3 Pro, Grok 4, and Qwen 3 Max. GPT 5.1 Pro spends an average of 16.8 minutes per workflow yet passes only 38.4% of workflows. Comprehensive case studies further highlight the challenges that real-world enterprise workflows pose for AI agents.

arXiv:2406.14194v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: The emergence of Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs) marks significant strides towards achieving general artificial intelligence. However, these advancements are accompanied by concerns about biased outputs, a challenge that has yet to be thoroughly explored. Existing benchmarks are not sufficiently comprehensive in evaluating biases due to their limited data scale, single questioning format and narrow sources of bias. To address this problem, we introduce VLBiasBench, a comprehensive benchmark designed to evaluate biases in LVLMs. VLBiasBench, features a dataset that covers nine distinct categories of social biases, including age, disability status, gender, nationality, physical appearance, race, religion, profession, social economic status, as well as two intersectional bias categories: race x gender and race x social economic status. To build a large-scale dataset, we use Stable Diffusion XL model to generate 46,848 high-quality images, which are combined with various questions to creat 128,342 samples. These questions are divided into open-ended and close-ended types, ensuring thorough consideration of bias sources and a comprehensive evaluation of LVLM biases from multiple perspectives. We conduct extensive evaluations on 15 open-source models as well as two advanced closed-source models, yielding new insights into the biases present in these models. Our benchmark is available at https://github.com/Xiangkui-Cao/VLBiasBench.