Skip to content
Preprint

Measuring Cross-Task Behavioral Consistency in Language Model Agents

Jul 2026 · 0 citations · 14 references
Computer Science

TL;DR

It is found that consistency is not reducible to success rate, since systems with comparable success can differ sharply in consistency, and that the frontier-versus-open-source consistency gap persists under a within-task control that holds task difficulty constant.

Abstract

Agent evaluation relies almost entirely on outcome metrics such as success rate, which capture whether an agent succeeds but not how consistently it behaves. We argue that behavioral consistency across tasks is a distinct and measurable property, and we introduce the Behavioral Consistency Metric (BCM) to quantify it. BCM trains a model to predict task success from behavioral features of agent execution traces, derives a per-trajectory feature-attribution vector, and measures the mean pairwise similarity of these vectors within an agent system. Across roughly 9,000 trajectories from six language model agents on software engineering tasks, our central finding is that cross-task and within-task consistency are distinct axes that can diverge: some systems are locally reproducible, behaving similarly on repeated attempts at one task, yet globally fragmented, with no stable strategy across different tasks, while others are consistent at both scales. Prior work measures only same-task reproducibility and so cannot observe this separation. We further find that consistency is not reducible to success rate, since systems with comparable success can differ sharply in consistency, and that the frontier-versus-open-source consistency gap persists under a within-task control that holds task difficulty constant. We position BCM as a process-level reliability signal that complements outcome metrics, and we are explicit about the conditions under which it is meaningful.

View source

Similar papers

#artificial intelligence Review Aug 2026

What Makes Software Issue Resolution Tasks Difficult for Agents?

Background. Advances in agentic systems are simultaneously, and rapidly, saturating benchmarks. Despite this often discussed phenomena, benchmark scores remain difficult to interpret due to the lack of control and characterization of task difficulty. More specifically, we currently have little understanding of what mak...

Ebtesam Al-Haque, Brittany Johnson · 0 citations
#artificial intelligence Preprint Oct 2026

Agents Are Systems, Not Models: Rethinking Agentic Evaluation

Agent evaluations increasingly go beyond a single success rate, reporting metrics such as cost, consistency, and robustness. Yet they typically treat the agent itself as fixed. In practice, an agent is a configurable system: users decide what to tell it, how long to let it run, and which model to use, and each of these...

Luis Wiedmann, Leander Girrbach, Cordelia Schmid et al. · 0 citations
#artificial intelligence Preprint Sep 2026

Do Agents Know When They Succeed? Calibrating Agent Confidence from Internal Representations

This paper investigates whether model's internal representations provide stronger signals of eventual task success in multi-turn agentic setups, and introduces two complementary methods: Latent Trajectory Dynamics (LTD) and the Action Representation Probe (ARP), which predicts success from representations formed at act...

Priyanka Mary Mammen, Emil Joswin, Srujananjali Medicherla · 0 citations
Preprint Aug 2026

Demystifying Agent Skills: Why They Work-Until They Don't

This work designs a contrastive study that combines controlled quantitative experiments with paired trajectory analysis and consolidates observations into a taxonomy of three high-level categories and twelve skill-use modes, showing that skills work when noisy trajectories become procedural anchors that stabilize execu...

Zhi-Yuan Jiang, Fan Huang, Hanwen Xing et al. · 4 citations · ⚡1
#artificial intelligence Preprint Sep 2026

Action-Space Shaping for LLM Agents: Measuring and Mitigating Tool-Schema Bias

Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown strong performance on tool-use agentic tasks when given a fixed tool schema. Yet a tool schema is not the action space of an agent; it is merely one interface representation of it. The same executable action can be exposed through many different, functionally equivalent tool defi...

Yinhong Liu, Zhi-Li Tan, Zi-Lin Wang et al. · 0 citations

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