Power Systems Agent Benchmark: Executable Evaluation of AI Agents in Electric Power Engineering

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2606.20950v1
• Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2026 21:30:39 GMT
• Title: Power Systems Agent Benchmark: Executable Evaluation of AI Agents in Electric Power Engineering
• Abstract summary: We introduce the Power Systems Agent Benchmark, an executable benchmark for power-engineering agents.<n>An agent receives a structured task and returns a structured solution; a deterministic evaluator returns a normalized score, and explicit violations.<n>The benchmark contains 41 task families across eight areas of power engineering, from power flow and protection to stability, microgrids, reliability, power quality, and forecasting.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Executable evaluation -- checking the consequences of an agent's actions with a program rather than grading its prose -- has become a prominent way to assess tool-using AI agents in software settings. Electric power engineering has not yet had an analogous benchmark: language-model use is still dominated by retrieval and text question answering, while agents acting on power-system artifacts remain mostly academic prototypes. We introduce the Power Systems Agent Benchmark, an executable benchmark for power-engineering agents. An agent receives a structured task and returns a structured solution; a deterministic evaluator recomputes the engineering quantities, checks operational constraints, and returns a feasibility flag, a normalized score, and explicit violations. The benchmark contains 41 task families across eight areas of power engineering, from power flow and protection to stability, microgrids, reliability, power quality, and forecasting. Each task is grounded in a citable source, standard, or documented engineering formulation. To resist contamination, held-out cases are synthesized on demand by per-family generators from private seeds: the construction is inspectable, but the instances remain private. In a reference evaluation with three command-line agents, the strongest score near the compact tier's ceiling, a smaller open model trails, and public and held-out performance are broadly consistent; a separate public-split grid with OpenCode and Aider probes harness effects. The reference evaluation doubles as quality control: unanimous failures flag candidate task or evaluator defects, and it exposed a latent evaluator bug missed by self-consistency checks. The evaluators are compact deterministic surrogates, but the task contract allows their internals to be upgraded to simulator-backed checks without changing how tasks are posed or solved.

Related papers

• ScrambleToolBench: Agents Search Exhaustively Even When Their Own Map Points to the Next Step [74.83535434786145]
  We introduce ScrambleToolBench, an interactive terminal benchmark designed to isolate behavioral reasoning.<n>The benchmark requires agents to uncover hidden tool behaviors entirely through trial-and-error interaction.<n>Our evaluation of state-of-the-art language models reveals that successful initial discovery does not translate into robust adaptation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-03T15:07:46Z)
• AI Agents Do Not Fail Alone:The Context Fails First [0.0]
  This paper validates context-engineering quality as an independent leading indicator of agent reliability.<n>We implement the measurement in ProofAgent-Harness, an open-source infrastructure for AI agent evaluation.<n>We show that context-quality criteria consistently predict their corresponding behavioral outcomes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-15T18:33:02Z)
• The Meta-Agent Challenge: Are Current Agents Capable of Autonomous Agent Development? [80.24951682268332]
  We introduce the Meta-Agent Challenge (MAC), an evaluation framework designed to test the capacity of frontier models for autonomous agent development.<n>To ensure evaluation integrity, this framework is secured by multi-layer defenses against reward hacking.<n>We demonstrate that meta-agents rarely match human-engineered baseline policies, and the few that do are dominated by proprietary frontier models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-03T04:58:17Z)
• AgentHijack: Benchmarking Computer Use Agent Robustness to Common Environment Corruptions [78.49000936275773]
  We introduce AgentHijack, a benchmark designed to evaluate the robustness of computer-use agents under common corruptions.<n>We evaluate a variety of desktop tasks that utilize MLLM-based agents and discover that even minor instances of corruption can result in substantial performance degradation.<n>We propose AgentHijack-Agent, a framework that integrates an action generator with enhanced grounding capabilities and an onlooker responsible for behavior summarization and environment checking.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-25T11:09:22Z)
• SkillGenBench: Benchmarking Skill Generation Pipelines for LLM Agents [15.669318649782285]
  We introduce SkillGenBench, a benchmark for evaluating skill generation pipelines under a unified protocol.<n>A generator receives raw corpora and produces standardized skill artifacts, which are then executed under fixed harnesses.<n> Experiments across a range of skill-generation methods and backbones show substantial performance variation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-18T17:28:36Z)
• ClawForge: Generating Executable Interactive Benchmarks for Command-Line Agents [59.626170560327274]
  We present textbfClawForge, a generator-backed benchmark framework for executable command-line categories under state conflict.<n>We instantiate this framework as the ClawForge-Bench (17 scenarios, 6 ability categories)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-13T21:34:08Z)
• AgentReputation: A Decentralized Agentic AI Reputation Framework [3.6704226968275253]
  We propose textbfAgentReputation, a decentralized, three-layer reputation framework for agentic AI systems.<n>The framework separates task execution, reputation services, and tamper-proof persistence to both leverage their respective strengths and enable independent evolution.<n>In quantifying, AgentReputation provides a decision-facing policy engine that supports resource allocation, access control, and adaptive verification escalation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-30T12:33:39Z)
• EmbodiedGovBench: A Benchmark for Governance, Recovery, and Upgrade Safety in Embodied Agent Systems [14.412476605788482]
  EmbodiedGovBench is a benchmark for governance-oriented evaluation of embodied agent systems.<n>It evaluates whether the system remains controllable, policy-bounded, recoverable, auditable, and evolution-safe under realistic perturbations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-13T08:34:04Z)
• Clawed and Dangerous: Can We Trust Open Agentic Systems? [12.04979073308511]
  Open agentic systems combine planning with external capabilities, persistent memory, and privileged execution.<n>This paper introduces a six-dimensional analytical taxonomy and synthesizes 50 papers spanning attacks, benchmarks, defenses, audits, and adjacent engineering foundations.<n>Our review shows that the literature is relatively mature in attack characterization and benchmark construction, but remains weak in deployment controls, operational governance, persistent-memory integrity, and capability revocation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-27T09:45:12Z)
• Dynamic analysis enhances issue resolution [53.50448142467294]
  DAIRA (Dynamic Analysis-enhanced Issue Resolution Agent) is an automated repair framework that embeds dynamic analysis into the agent's reasoning cycle.<n> Driven by a Test Tracing-Driven methodology, DAIRA utilizes lightweight monitors to extract critical runtime data.<n>When powered by Gemini 3 Flash Preview, DAIRA establishes a new state-of-the-art (SOTA) performance, achieving a 79.4% resolution rate on the SWE-bench Verified dataset.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-23T14:48:54Z)
• The Geometry of Benchmarks: A New Path Toward AGI [0.0]
  We introduce a geometric framework in which all psychometric batteries for AI agents are treated as points in a structured moduli space.<n>First, we define an Autonomous AI (AAI) Scale, a Kardashev-style hierarchy of autonomy grounded in measurable performance.<n>Second, we construct a moduli space of batteries, identifying equivalence classes of benchmarks that are indistinguishable at the level of agent orderings and capability inferences.<n>Third, we introduce a general Generator-Verifier-Updater (GVU) operator that subsumes reinforcement learning, self-play, debate and verifier-based fine-tuning
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-03T21:34:09Z)
• Establishing Best Practices for Building Rigorous Agentic Benchmarks [94.69724201080155]
  We show that many agentic benchmarks have issues in task setup or reward design.<n>Such issues can lead to under- or overestimation of agents' performance by up to 100% in relative terms.<n>We introduce the Agentic Benchmark Checklist (ABC), a set of guidelines that we synthesized from our benchmark-building experience.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-03T17:35:31Z)

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.