Crashing Waves vs. Rising Tides: Preliminary Findings on AI Automation from Thousands of Worker Evaluations of Labor Market Tasks

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.01363v1
• Date: Wed, 01 Apr 2026 20:22:03 GMT
• Title: Crashing Waves vs. Rising Tides: Preliminary Findings on AI Automation from Thousands of Worker Evaluations of Labor Market Tasks
• Abstract summary: AI performance is high and improving rapidly across a wide range of tasks.<n>We estimate that, in 2024-Q2, AI models successfully complete tasks that take humans approximately 3-4 hours with about a 50% success rate, increasing to about 65% by 2025-Q3.
• Score: 1.5332445036808136
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: We propose that AI automation is a continuum between: (i) crashing waves where AI capabilities surge abruptly over small sets of tasks, and (ii) rising tides where the increase in AI capabilities is more continuous and broad-based. We test for these effects in preliminary evidence from an ongoing evaluation of AI capabilities across over 3,000 broad-based tasks derived from the U.S. Department of Labor O*NET categorization that are text-based and thus LLM-addressable. Based on more than 17,000 evaluations by workers from these jobs, we find little evidence of crashing waves (in contrast to recent work by METR), but substantial evidence that rising tides are the primary form of AI automation. AI performance is high and improving rapidly across a wide range of tasks. We estimate that, in 2024-Q2, AI models successfully complete tasks that take humans approximately 3-4 hours with about a 50% success rate, increasing to about 65% by 2025-Q3. If recent trends in AI capability growth persist, this pace of AI improvement implies that LLMs will be able to complete most text-related tasks with success rates of, on average, 80%-95% by 2029 at a minimally sufficient quality level. Achieving near-perfect success rates at this quality level or comparable success rates at superior quality would require several additional years. These AI capability improvements would impact the economy and labor market as organizations adopt AI, which could have a substantially longer timeline.

Related papers

• When Does AI Augment Work? A Workflow-Level Framework for Human-Agent Collaboration [78.16115745870405]
  We aim to characterise the value of artificial intelligence in the workplace.<n>Current studies largely measure this value in terms of the current automation capabilities and public adoption of AI.<n>To account for this, we must expand the scope of our analysis beyond atomised tasks of today.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-09-11T06:29:34Z)
• Agentic AI and Occupational Displacement: A Multi-Regional Task Exposure Analysis of Emerging Labor Market Disruption [1.066082625513843]
  We extend the Acemoglu-Restrepo task exposure framework to address the labor market effects of agentic artificial intelligence systems.<n>Unlike prior automation technologies that substitute for individual subtasks, agentic AI systems execute end-to-end using multi-step reasoning.<n>We introduce the Agentic Exposure score, a composite measure computed algorithmically from O*NET task data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-31T19:36:36Z)
• The Iceberg Index: Measuring Workforce Exposure Across the AI Economy [14.006405783858703]
  The Iceberg Index captures technical exposure, where AI can perform occupational tasks, not displacement outcomes or adoption timelines.<n>The Index captures technical exposure, where AI can perform occupational tasks, not displacement outcomes or adoption timelines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-29T03:30:45Z)
• LIMI: Less is More for Agency [49.63355240818081]
  LIMI (Less Is More for Intelligent Agency) demonstrates that agency follows radically different development principles.<n>We show that sophisticated agentic intelligence can emerge from minimal but strategically curated demonstrations of autonomous behavior.<n>Our findings establish the Agency Efficiency Principle: machine autonomy emerges not from data abundance but from strategic curation of high-quality agentic demonstrations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-22T10:59:32Z)
• Challenges and Paths Towards AI for Software Engineering [55.95365538122656]
  We discuss progress in AI for software engineering in threefold manner.<n>First, we provide a structured taxonomy of concrete tasks in AI for software engineering.<n>Second, we outline several key bottlenecks that limit current approaches.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-28T17:17:57Z)
• Measuring AI Ability to Complete Long Tasks [5.986082428339293]
  We measure the time humans typically take to complete tasks that AI models can complete with 50% success rate.<n>Current frontier AI models such as Claude 3.7 Sonnet have a 50% time horizon of around 50 minutes.<n>The increase in AI models' time horizons seems to be driven by greater reliability and ability to adapt to mistakes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-18T17:59:31Z)
• Evaluating Intelligence via Trial and Error [59.80426744891971]
  We introduce Survival Game as a framework to evaluate intelligence based on the number of failed attempts in a trial-and-error process.<n>When the expectation and variance of failure counts are both finite, it signals the ability to consistently find solutions to new challenges.<n>Our results show that while AI systems achieve the Autonomous Level in simple tasks, they are still far from it in more complex tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-26T05:59:45Z)
• Which Economic Tasks are Performed with AI? Evidence from Millions of Claude Conversations [18.86239369192921]
  We leverage a recent privacy-preserving system to analyze over four million Claude.ai conversations.<n>Our analysis reveals that AI usage primarily concentrates in software development and writing tasks.<n>We also analyze how AI is being used for tasks, finding 57% of usage suggests augmentation of human capabilities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-11T00:46:43Z)
• Towards the Terminator Economy: Assessing Job Exposure to AI through LLMs [10.844598404826355]
  One-third of U.S. employment is highly exposed to AI, primarily in high-skill jobs requiring a graduate or postgraduate level of education.<n>Even in high-skill occupations, AI exhibits high variability in task substitution, suggesting that AI and humans complement each other within the same occupation.<n>All results, models, and code are freely available online to allow the community to reproduce our results, compare outcomes, and use our work as a benchmark to monitor AI's progress over time.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-27T08:14:18Z)
• Fairness in AI and Its Long-Term Implications on Society [68.8204255655161]
  We take a closer look at AI fairness and analyze how lack of AI fairness can lead to deepening of biases over time. We discuss how biased models can lead to more negative real-world outcomes for certain groups. If the issues persist, they could be reinforced by interactions with other risks and have severe implications on society in the form of social unrest.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-16T11:22:59Z)
• Can Machines Imitate Humans? Integrative Turing-like tests for Language and Vision Demonstrate a Narrowing Gap [56.611702960809644]
  We benchmark AI's ability to imitate humans in three language tasks and three vision tasks.<n>Next, we conducted 72,191 Turing-like tests with 1,916 human judges and 10 AI judges.<n>Imitation ability showed minimal correlation with conventional AI performance metrics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-23T16:16:52Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.