Sirui Zeng

Sneha Gathani, Sirui Zeng, Diya Patel et al. · mit

What-if analysis (WIA) is an iterative, multi-step process where users explore and compare hypothetical scenarios by adjusting parameters, applying constraints, and scoping data through interactive interfaces. Current tools fall short of supporting effective interactive WIA: spreadsheet and BI tools require time-consuming and laborious setup, while LLM-based chatbot interfaces are semantically fragile, frequently misinterpret intent, and produce inconsistent results as conversations progress. To address these limitations, we present a two-stage workflow that translates natural language (NL) WIA questions into interactive visual interfaces via an intermediate representation, powered by the Praxa Specification Language (PSL): first, LLMs generate PSL specifications from NL questions capturing analytical intent and logic, enabling validation and repair of erroneous specifications; and second, the specifications are compiled into interactive visual interfaces with parameter controls and linked visualizations. We benchmark this workflow with 405 WIA questions spanning 11 WIA types, 5 datasets, and 3 state-of-the-art LLMs. The results show that across models, half of specifications (52.42%) are generated correctly without intervention. We perform an analysis of the failure cases and derive an error taxonomy spanning non-functional errors (specifications fail to compile) and functional errors (specifications compile but misrepresent intent). Based on the taxonomy, we apply targeted repairs on the failure cases using few-shot prompts and improve the success rate to 80.42%. Finally, we show how undetected functional errors propagate through compilation into plausible but misleading interfaces, demonstrating that the intermediate specification is critical for reliably bridging NL and interactive WIA interface in LLM-powered WIA systems.

Sneha Gathani, Kevin Li, Raghav Thind et al. · mit

What-if analysis is widely used to explore hypothetical scenarios and evaluate alternative pathways to desired results. However, current approaches are fragmented: systems implement what-if capabilities under diverse terminologies with different analytic techniques. Such fragmentation limits expressiveness, impedes flexible composition and reuse of workflows, and hinders tighter integration with AI. We present PRAXA, a compositional grammar of what-if analysis derived from recurring patterns across 141 publications in visual analytics and HCI venues. PRAXA formulates three primitives: (1) data, defining variables under analysis, (2) model, specifying predictive mechanisms, and (3) interaction operations-pairs of user actions and system responses that execute analyses. We encode PRAXA into a declarative specification language, PSL. To evaluate PRAXA, we first show expressiveness by reconstructing representative workflows from prior work as structured compositions, exposing the predominant focus on single-step rather than multi-step reasoning. Second, we demonstrate composability by revealing that capabilities described under distinct terminologies share the same grammatical structure with different parameterizations, and that new multi-step workflows emerge through composition. Third, we illustrate PSL as an intermediate representation for translating natural-language what-if queries into executable interactive interfaces, enabling inspection, validation, and more transparent AI integration. By unifying diverse what-if approaches as a grammar, PRAXA provides a foundation for analyzing, composing, and supporting workflows in next-generation what-if systems.

Zekun Li, Shinda Huang, Jiangtian Wang et al.

As language agents increasingly automate critical tasks, their ability to follow domain-specific standard operating procedures (SOPs), policies, and constraints when taking actions and making tool calls becomes essential yet remains underexplored. To address this gap, we develop an automated evaluation pipeline SOPBench with: (1) executable environments containing 167 tools/functions across seven customer service domains with service-specific SOPs and rule-based verifiers, (2) an automated test generation framework producing over 900 verified test cases, and (3) an automated evaluation framework to rigorously assess agent adherence from multiple dimensions. Our approach transforms each service-specific SOP code program into a directed graph of executable functions and requires agents to call these functions based on natural language SOP descriptions. The original code serves as oracle rule-based verifiers to assess compliance, reducing reliance on manual annotations and LLM-based evaluations. We evaluate 18 leading models, and results show the task is challenging even for top-tier models (like GPT-4o, Claude-3.7-Sonnet), with variances across domains. Reasoning models like o4-mini-high show superiority while other powerful models perform less effectively (pass rates of 30%-50%), and small models (7B, 8B) perform significantly worse. Additionally, language agents can be easily jailbroken to overlook SOPs and constraints. Code, data, and over 24k agent trajectories are released at https://github.com/Leezekun/SOPBench.

Yishuo Yuan, Jiayi Sheng, Sirui Zeng et al.

Financial markets are inherently non-stationary, driven by complex interactions among macroeconomic regimes, microstructural frictions, and behavioral dynamics. Building quantitative strategies that remain profitable demands the continuous coupling of factor discovery, regime-adaptive selection, and risk-constrained execution. Prevailing approaches, however, optimize these components under static or isolated assumptions. Factor mining frameworks typically treat alpha discovery as a one-time search process, implicitly assuming that factor efficacy persists across market regimes. Execution-oriented systems often adopt role-playing agent architectures that simulate anthropomorphic trading committees, introducing behavioral noise rather than systematic rationality. Consequently, a fully automated, rationality-driven framework unifying a coherent quantitative pipeline remains absent. We introduce AlphaCrafter, a full-stack multi-agent framework that closes this gap through a continuously adaptive factor-to-execution pipeline, designed to track and respond to evolving market conditions without manual intervention. AlphaCrafter operates via three specialized agents: a Miner that continuously expands the factor pool via LLM-guided search, a Screener that assesses prevailing market conditions to construct regime-conditioned factor ensembles, and a Trader that translates these ensembles into quantitative strategies under explicit risk constraints. Together, these three agents form a closed-loop cross-sectional trading system that adapts holistically to evolving market dynamics. Extensive experiments on CSI 300 and S&P 500 demonstrate that AlphaCrafter consistently outperforms state-of-the-art baselines in risk-adjusted returns while exhibiting the lowest cross-trial variance, confirming that integrated and adaptive factor-to-execution design yields robust trading performance.