2605.29225v1 May 28, 2026 cs.AI

BenchTrace: A Benchmark for Testing Reflection Ability and Controlled Evolution in LLM Agents

Fei Cheng
Fei Cheng
Graduate School of Informatics, Kyoto University
Citations: 909
h-index: 15
Jiahao Huang
Jiahao Huang
Citations: 2
h-index: 1
Junfeng Jiang
Junfeng Jiang
Citations: 122
h-index: 5
Akiko Aizawa
Akiko Aizawa
Citations: 112
h-index: 5
Zefan Yu
Zefan Yu
Citations: 65
h-index: 2

Self-evolving agents improve over time by reflecting on past failures, but existing evaluation is limited in two ways: it measures only task scores, leaving reflection quality unknown, and it relies on agents' own episode runs, offering no mechanism to target specific failure patterns. We present \textbf{BenchTrace}, a benchmark for evaluating self-evolution ability in LLM agents. BenchTrace is built on a snapshot-reflection dataset of 1,821 annotated episodes spanning six diverse tasks, and comprises a \textbf{Reflection Evaluation} that probes failure identification through targeted QA tasks, and an \textbf{Evolution Evaluation} that tests whether past failure experience translates into avoidance behavior in a controlled self-evolution simulation. Building on BenchTrace, we propose \textbf{failure avoidance rate (FAR)}, a new evaluation metric measuring the fraction of test cases in which the agent successfully avoids the target failure instance. Experiments with Qwen3-32B and GPT-4.1 reveal that both models fall below a 30\% end-to-end pass rate on reflection evaluation, with diagnosis as the primary bottleneck. Evolution evaluation shows that self-evolution methods generally improve FAR over the non-evolving baseline, but agents forget early lessons as noise episodes accumulate, and agents fail to generalize their reflections beyond the specific context, causing negative transfer across task contexts. Our correlation analysis further reveals that only a fully correct reflection is strongly associated with higher FAR. BenchTrace exposes concrete limits of current self-evolution approaches and provides a controlled, model-agnostic framework for targeted evaluation.

0 Citations
0 Influential
7.5 Altmetric
37.5 Score
Original PDF

No Analysis Report Yet

This paper hasn't been analyzed by Gemini yet.

Log in to request an AI analysis.

댓글

댓글을 작성하려면 로그인하세요.

아직 댓글이 없습니다. 첫 번째 댓글을 남겨보세요!