探索全球前沿学术脉络

DynAMO:Dynamic Asset Management Orchestration via Topological Multi-Agent Scheduling

arXiv:2606.19382v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: While LLM-powered agents offer end-to-end automation for industrial asset lifecycles, real-world Industry 4.0 deployment is hindered by latency, concurrency instability, and safety risks. We present DynAMO (Dynamic Asset Management Orchestration), a deployment-ready engine using a Plan-then-Execute architecture to generate verifiable workflow graphs. DynAMO supports both SequentialWorkflow (topological execution) and ParallelWorkflow (dependency-aware concurrency). By dynamically identifying independent tasks, DynAMO preserves structural correctness and safety while significantly improving efficiency through controlled reasoning overlap. Across six controlled experiments on the AssetOpsBench industrial benchmark, DynAMO demonstrates substantial performance and robustness gains. Parallel execution reduces end-to-end latency by a median of 1.6x over sequential orchestration, rising to 1.8x on highly parallelizable workflows. After instrumenting external tool calls with realistic latencies, a latency decomposition shows that LLM reasoning and orchestration still account for more than 90% of execution time, identifying model inference as the primary system bottleneck. Structured context pruning reduces inference latency by approximately 30%, and DynAMO maintains correct functional behaviour (task completion, agent sequencing, and output quality) while exhibiting graceful degradation under controlled fault injection. Reproducibility analysis further confirms stable execution under repeated runs, with parallel scheduling reducing latency variance. These findings establish DynAMO as a practical blueprint for scalable, safe, and latency-aware agent deployment in Industry 4.0 automation pipelines. Code is available at: https://github.com/kushwaha001/DynAMO

Evoflux: Inference-Time Evolution of Executable Tool Workflows for Compact Agents

arXiv:2606.12674v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Compact language models (LMs) reduce cost, latency, and deployment risk for tool agents. Yet MCP-style tool use requires more than isolated function calling: an agent must discover tools from live catalogs, satisfy schemas, preserve dependencies across intermediate outputs, and ground final responses in executed evidence. Small planners often generate plausible workflow graphs that fail under tool resolution, parameter validation, dependency tracking, or execution. We argue that this failure mode is poorly handled by small-corpus distillation. A few hundred teacher traces can teach workflow format, but rarely cover the recovery behavior needed to repair failed plans over changing tool catalogs. We introduce Evoflux, an inference-time evolutionary search method that treats compact tool use as the repair of executable tool workflows. It evolves typed workflow graphs through structured edits, execution feedback, adaptive intensity, meta-guided redesign, and diversity pruning. On held-out MCP-Bench tasks spanning live MCP servers and 250 tools, Evoflux raises execution feasibility from roughly 3% to 17-24% across small planners. In contrast, SFT and SFT+DPO on the same search-mined data match, underperform, or collapse below zero-shot performance; ReAct reaches higher peaks, but with higher variance and token cost. These results show that execution-grounded search is more reliable under scarce teacher-trace budgets.

Beyond Static Leaderboards: Predictive Validity for the Evaluation of LLM Agents

arXiv:2606.19704v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Agent benchmarks are growing fast, but no single benchmark touches more than four or five of the dimensions that deployment exposes. This paper aggregates the largest coordinated deep-dive of one MCP-based industrial-agent benchmark to date: fourteen parallel implementation studies covering new asset classes (including a multi-modal visual extension), alternative orchestrations, retrieval strategies, reasoning modes, infrastructure optimizations, and evaluation-methodology probes. Consolidating those studies with seven prior agent benchmarks, we argue that aggregate-score leaderboards systematically underspecify deployed-agent evaluation. Rankings derived from aggregate scores do not transfer to out-of-distribution settings; recent public-to-hidden competition retrospectives provide direct empirical evidence of this rank instability. We propose ranking configurations by predictive validity, the correlation between in-sample and out-of-sample rank, rather than in-sample mean, and report a twelve-tier measurement apparatus that exposes the deployment-relevant dimensions HELM and its agent-era successors collapse. The position is operationalized through three falsifiable out-of-distribution criteria with explicit thresholds; existing evidence partly supports it but is too thin to confirm. We close with a pre-registered pilot design and a field-level vision for what the next generation of agentic benchmarks should report.