Yuzhong Zhang

Liting Lin, Boxi Yu, Yuzhong Zhang et al.

Conversational LLM agents can cause real-world harm when their internal workflows fail, such as completing a transaction without confirmation. Testing these state-dependent failures is difficult because critical boundaries, such as identity checks and confirmation gates, are hidden behind multi-turn conversational prerequisites, rendering them inaccessible to standard tests. We present AgentEval, a black-box testing framework that discovers and stresses these stateful boundaries. AgentEval interacts with an agent to mine a \emph{conversational workflow graph}, a model of its behavior. Instead of prompting blindly, AgentEval uses this graph's structure to enumerate specific guards and prerequisites as test targets, replaying the conversational path to a boundary before applying a perturbation. AgentEval then executes each test, determining whether it passes or fails using only the conversation turns. We benchmark AgentEval against a privileged, white-box auditor with access to the agent's underlying source code, which AgentEval never sees. On four $τ^3$-bench agents, AgentEval successfully generates tests covering $23$--$38$ distinct boundaries per agent; ablation studies attribute the gain to the graph's structure: $23$ distinct boundaries versus $12$ with a prompt-only baseline, at lower duplicate and false-alarm rates.

Boxi Yu, Yuzhong Zhang, Liting Lin et al.

Large language models (LLMs) continue to hallucinate in retrieval-augmented generation (RAG), producing claims that are unsupported by or conflict with the retrieved context. Detecting such errors remains challenging when faithfulness is evaluated solely with respect to the retrieved context. Existing approaches either provide coarse-grained, answer-level scores or focus on open-domain factuality, often lacking fine-grained, evidence-grounded diagnostics. We present RT4CHART, a retromorphic testing framework for context-faithfulness assessment. RT4CHART decomposes model outputs into independently verifiable claims and performs hierarchical, local-to-global verification against the retrieved context. Each claim is assigned one of three labels: entailed, contradicted, or baseless. Furthermore, RT4CHART maps claim-level decisions back to specific answer spans and retrieves explicit supporting or refuting evidence from the context, enabling fine-grained and interpretable auditing. We evaluate RT4CHART on RAGTruth++ (408 samples) and RAGTruth-Enhance (2,675 samples), a newly re-annotated benchmark. RT4CHART achieves the best answer-level hallucination detection F1 among all baselines. On RAGTruth++, it reaches an F1 score of 0.776, outperforming the strongest baseline by 83%. On RAGTruth-Enhance, it achieves a span-level F1 of 47.5%. Ablation studies show that the hierarchical verification design is the primary driver of performance gains. Finally, our re-annotation reveals 1.68x more hallucination cases than the original labels, suggesting that existing benchmarks substantially underestimate the prevalence of hallucinations.

Aoyang Fang, Yifan Yang, Jin'ao Shang et al.

Root cause analysis (RCA) poses a holistic test of LLM agentic capabilities, such as long-context understanding, multi-step reasoning, and tool use. However, existing datasets suffer from a fundamental gap: they label only the root cause, not the propagation path connecting it to the observed symptom, which largely simplifies the task to naive pattern matching. To support rigorous evaluation, we introduce PAVE, a step-wise labeling protocol that leverages known interventions from fault injection to reconstruct causal propagation paths. The mechanism is forward verification: reasoning from cause to effect rather than inferring backward from symptoms. Applying PAVE yields OpenRCA 2.0 (500 instances), the first cross-system RCA benchmark with step-wise causal annotations for LLM agents. Across 11 frontier LLMs, recovering the exact root-cause set succeeds in only 20.7% of cases on average. To locate where this difficulty lies, we relax the criterion and find what we call the ungrounded diagnosis: agents identify at least one correct root-cause service in 76.0% of cases, but ground that service in a verified causal propagation path to the observed symptom in only 61.5%. Outcome-only evaluation hides this failure mode; step-wise causal ground truth is the missing piece for trustworthy LLM-based RCA agents.

Jiasheng Zheng, Boxi Cao, Boxi Yu et al.

Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) has recently emerged as the cornerstone for shaping the remarkable coding abilities of Large Language Models (LLMs). However, the scalability of RLVR is severely constrained by the scarcity of sufficiently challenging verifiable code tasks that target near the model's edge of competence. Prior studies often rely on heuristic seed expansions for data synthesis, which severely limits both novelty and difficulty. Consequently, the training value of such data fails to scale proportionally with the size of its synthesis. To this end, we propose Atomic Decomposition and Recombination (ADR), a novel framework that generates verifiable code tasks via decomposition into atomic elements and controlled recombination, thereby enabling the generation of genuinely novel and challenging verifiable code tasks. Experiments and analysis demonstrate that ADR achieves superior originality, difficulty, diversity, and test quality over existing baselines, and consistently delivers greater improvements in code ability across RLVR in diverse downstream domains, including algorithmic programming, tool usage, and data science. Our work sheds light on a new paradigm for novel code task synthesis and scalable RLVR training.