AgentBoard: An Analytical Evaluation Board for Multi-turn LLM Agents
> Source: arXiv:2401.13178. Authors include Chang Ma, Junlei Zhang, Zhihao Zhu, Cheng Yang, Yujiu Yang, Yaohui Jin, et al.
Background
Most existing LLM agent benchmarks report only a single final outcome (e.g., task success rate). This end-result style of evaluation gives researchers little insight into *where* a multi-turn agent fails — planning, tool invocation, or step-wise execution. AgentBoard addresses this by providing an analytical evaluation framework for multi-turn agents.
Key Contributions
- Comprehensive multi-turn benchmark: spans diverse agent capabilities — embodied tasks (e.g., ALFRED, ScienceWorld), interactive games, web/GUI operation, tool use, and mathematical reasoning — unified under a multi-turn interaction format.
- Progress Rate metric: a fine-grained metric computing the fraction of sub-goals completed per turn, giving dense feedback even for failed episodes and enabling turn-by-turn comparison of agent behavior.
- Analytical evaluation board: an open-source visualization and analysis interface for inspecting interaction trajectories, success rates, progress rates, and per-turn statistics.
- Systematic benchmarking: evaluates open-source and proprietary LLMs (including GPT-4-class models), revealing that proprietary models still lead but open models are competitive, and exposing distinct failure modes across turns and task categories.
- Shifts agent evaluation from static single-shot metrics (analogous to nDCG for retrieval) toward process-aware metrics such as sub-goal completion and trajectory quality.
- Makes failures diagnosable: engineers can tell whether an agent struggles with perception, planning, action grounding, or recovery from mistakes.
- Provides a reproducible, open-source setup that lowers the entry cost for agent research.
- Evaluation of Retrieval-Augmented Generation: A Survey (arXiv:2405.07437)
- ARES: An Automated Evaluation Framework for RAG (arXiv:2311.09476)
- A Dataset of Information-Seeking Questions and Answers Anchored in Research Articles (arXiv:2105.03011)
Why It Matters for Search/Agent Evaluation
Takeaways
1. End-to-end success rates are too sparse to guide iteration on multi-turn agents; process metrics like progress rate are essential. 2. Different task domains stress different capabilities — a single aggregate score hides these trade-offs. 3. Closed-source models retain an edge in agentic settings, but the gap varies substantially by capability, arguing for capability-specific reporting.