Search arXiv⌕ Search

arXiv · 2605.17554

Evaluating Deep Research Agents on Expert Consulting Work: A Benchmark with Verifiers, Rubrics, and Cognitive Traps

Abstract

Frontier deep research agents (DRAs) are being deployed in enterprise workflows faster than they are being evaluated. Existing benchmarks measure factual recall, single-hop QA, or generic agentic skill, and miss the multi-document, decision-grade deliverables DRAs are asked to produce. We introduce a benchmark of 70 SME-authored management consulting prompts, each embedding cognitive traps that penalize surface-pattern reasoning. Three frontier agents, namely Claude Opus~4.6, OpenAI o3-deep-research and Gemini~3.1~Pro deep-research, are scored on two complementary layers: deterministic binary verifiers (mean 14.9 per task) and a five-criterion 0--3 SME rubric (Data Integrity, Analytical Rigor, Relevance \& Focus, Execution Precision, Format \& Deliverability), combined into a Verifier-Rubric Score (VRS, 0--100). Acceptance under a joint threshold (rubric mean $\geq 2.5$ and verifier pass rate $\geq 80\%$) is uniformly low: o3 15.7\%, Claude 12.9\%, Gemini 12.9\%. Pairwise differences are statistically indistinguishable. On the continuous VRS, o3 leads (61.4~[CI: 55.2,\,67.5]), followed by Gemini (52.6) and Claude (38.5); the o3--Claude gap ($Δ{=}22.9$, $p{<}0.001$) survives Bonferroni correction. No agent averages above the rubric's ``adequate'' threshold of 2.0; no agent's mean verifier pass rate reaches the 80\% acceptance floor. Each agent fails distinctively: Claude leads on data fabrication and file-access failures; o3 propagates cascading computation errors; Gemini oscillates between the highest perfect-verifier rate and the most catastrophic collapses. The benchmark, evaluation code, and full prompt corpus are publicly released.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Tanmay Asthana, Aman Saksena, Divyansh Sahu. 2026-06-25. Evaluating Deep Research Agents on Expert Consulting Work: A Benchmark with Verifiers, Rubrics, and Cognitive Traps. https://arxiv.org/abs/2605.17554

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Generating Interesting Scientific Ideas using Knowledge Graphs and LLMs: Evaluations with 100 Research Group Leaders

The rapid growth of scientific literature makes it increasingly challenging for researchers to identify novel and impactful ideas, especially across disciplines. Modern artificial intelligence (AI) systems offer new opportunities for scientific ideation, but how compelling are AI-generated ideas, and how can their quality be improved? Here, we introduce SciMuse, which generates personalized research ideas using a knowledge graph of 58 million papers and a large language model (LLM). A central focus of this work is to understand how interesting these ideas are. Therefore, we conducted a large-scale evaluation in which more than 100 research group leaders -- spanning the natural sciences to the humanities -- rated over 4,400 personalized ideas according to their level of interest. Overall, expert ratings were modest (mean 2.40 on a 5-point scale, most common rating 1), while 24.9% of ideas were rated 4 or 5. We find that supplying concept pairs selected using the knowledge graph does not improve expert-rated interest over a titles-only GPT baseline. High-citation-predicted pairs even showed a weak tendency (1.94$σ$) toward lower interest than random pairs. Nevertheless, graph features can be used to control properties of ideas, and, using this unique evaluation dataset, we show that idea interest can be predicted with both a supervised neural network based on graph features and a zero-shot ranking approach based on an LLM. Our work provides an AI methodology for generating scientific ideas and a large-scale interdisciplinary expert evaluation, paving the way to study and improve difficult-to-measure metrics such as expert-perceived scientific interestingness.

cs.AI↗

LOGIC: Efficient and Robust Contextual Biasing for Speech LLMs via Logit-Space Integration

Recognizing entity phrases remains a critical challenge for speech large language models. Existing prompting methods lack an explicit decoding-time biasing weight, limiting their controllability. Generative error correction methods can introduce hallucinated over-corrections. To address these limitations, we propose LOGIC (logit-space integration for contextual biasing), a robust framework operating directly in the logit space. By decoupling context injection from input processing, LOGIC enables explicit control over the biasing strength. Extensive experiments with an open-source speech large language model across 11 locales demonstrate that LOGIC achieves an average 9% relative reduction in entity word error rate, with an average false alarm rate increase of 0.3% and a 2.8% relative runtime overhead. When combined with prompting, LOGIC can reduce entity word error rate by 5% relative to the prompt-only method.

cs.AI↗

Decoding ML Decision: An Agentic Reasoning Framework for Large-Scale Ranking System

Modern large-scale ranking systems operate within a sophisticated landscape of competing objectives, operational constraints, and evolving product requirements. Progress in this domain is increasingly bottlenecked by the engineering context constraint: the arduous process of translating ambiguous product intent into reasonable, executable, verifiable hypotheses, rather than by modeling techniques alone. We present GEARS (Generative Engine for Agentic Ranking Systems), a framework that reframes ranking optimization as an autonomous discovery process within a programmable experimentation environment. Rather than treating optimization as static model selection, GEARS leverages Specialized Agent Skills to encapsulate ranking expert knowledge into reusable reasoning capabilities, enabling operators to steer systems via high-level intent vibe personalization. Furthermore, to ensure production reliability, the framework incorporates validation hooks to enforce statistical robustness and filter out brittle policies that overfit short-term signals. Experimental validation across diverse product surfaces demonstrates that GEARS consistently identifies superior, near-Pareto-efficient policies by synergizing algorithmic signals with deep ranking context while maintaining rigorous deployment stability.

cs.AI↗