Skip to content
Preprint

AV-AIVAT: 74x Cheaper Agent Evaluation with Certified Anytime-Valid Stopping in Imperfect-Information Games

Aug 2026 · 1 citation · 53 references
Computer Science

TL;DR

AV-AIVAT turns variance reduction into efficient, auditable early stopping while separating asymptotic screening from exact certification, so an evaluation can stop the moment its evidence suffices and hand a third party everything needed to recheck the verdict at that very stopping time.

Abstract

Deciding which of two agents is stronger means playing games until skill outweighs luck, and every game costs money, model inference, or expert time. Since the number of games needed is unknown, fixed-budget evaluations either keep paying after the result is settled or stop before the agents can be told apart, while naive optional stopping with an ordinary confidence interval invalidates the stated level. We make such an evaluation stop as soon as its evidence suffices, with the guarantee intact. The Action-Informed Value Assessment Tool (AIVAT) reduces variance in imperfect-information games through conditional mean-zero corrections, by a median $54\times$ across 15 LLM agent configurations spanning 71,439 paired Heads-Up No-Limit Hold'em (HUNL) hands, but does not say when to stop. We combine AIVAT with continuously monitored Confidence Sequences (CSs) into anytime-valid AIVAT (AV-AIVAT), whose online value model learns only from past games so that no game scores its own correction. At the nominal 95\% level and a target precision of $\pm1$ Big Blind, raw outcomes need a median $74\times$ as many hands as AIVAT-corrected outcomes to stop under the Asymptotic CS (AsympCS). Exact finite-sample certification uses the Empirical-Bernstein CS (EB-CS), which needs an independently justified bound on corrected payoffs. We establish such a bound structurally for Leduc hold'em and characterize a width floor set by the CS's bet cap and that bound, which governs how much of a variance gain becomes earlier stopping; the descriptive HUNL EB-CS runs show a median $1.37\times$ stopping-time ratio. AV-AIVAT turns variance reduction into efficient, auditable early stopping while separating asymptotic screening from exact certification, so an evaluation can stop the moment its evidence suffices and hand a third party everything needed to recheck the verdict at that very stopping time.

View source

Similar papers

#natural language process... Preprint Oct 2026

Finding the Move Is Not Winning the Game: XiangqiBench for Closed-Loop Evaluation of LLM Agents

Static evaluations credit a language model for naming the right move, but an agent must carry a plan through to a verified outcome while an opponent responds. We introduce XiangqiBench, an executable benchmark that measures this difference in Chinese chess: starting from 119 tactical endgames with forced mates supporte...

Yekun Chai, Qiwei Peng, Hao-Yi Xiong · 1 citation
#artificial intelligence Preprint Aug 2026

FM-Bench: A Benchmark for Long-Horizon Management with Competing Agents

Language model agents now execute bounded tasks reliably. Whether they can sustain effective decision-making over long horizons, where actions have cumulative consequences and the environment responds to their choices, remains largely unmeasured. FM-Bench (Football Management Benchmark) measures this. An LLM agent runs...

Tianyou Wang, Chong-Yang Gao, Ke-Zhen Chen et al. · 1 citation
#artificial intelligence Preprint Oct 2026

Verification and Self-Improvement in Agentic AI: Foundations and Limits

A self-improving agent can find accepted solutions more often without expanding the tasks its verification interface can accept. We extend task-relative verification with explicit support and transcript interfaces to distinguish search gains from changes in accepted-task coverage. A stage's native reach contains tasks...

Chien-Ping Lu · 1 citation
#artificial intelligence Preprint Sep 2026

Propose, Don't Judge: An Anytime-Valid Referee for LLM Agents That Mine Investment Factors

Language-model agents now run the whole of quantitative factor research: they propose investment factors, backtest them, select the survivors and retire them, and the answer is governed self-evolution: the agent may propose, and a frozen statistical referee that the agent cannot touch must judge.

Bo Qu, Ming-Guang Chen, Li-Cheng Wang · 1 citation
#artificial intelligence Preprint Oct 2026

A Trust Layer for Agent Evaluation

A Trust Layer for Agent Evaluation is introduced, an additive post-hoc framework that reports, beside each recorded score, whether it should be believed, whether the result is stable under repeated execution.

Mohammadreza Sediqin, Shivali Dalmia, Srinivasa Karthikeya Reddy Kovvuri et al. · 2 citations
#artificial intelligence Preprint Sep 2026

How Do Agent Harnesses Create Value? Planning Information and Release Control in Stateful LLM Agents

Which component matters more depends on the loss assigned to erroneous acceptance: at low liability the planning gain dominates; at high liability the verifier's avoided false passes dominate; and a standalone verifier captures nearly all the false-pass benefit of the full planning-plus-verification stack at a fraction...

Yu-Kun Zhang, Ke-Mu Xu, Yi-Shen Chen · 2 citations

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.