Michael Heinrich

Xinbo Xu, Ruihan Yang, Haiyang Shen et al.

Coding agents are increasingly deployed in real software development, where a single version iteration requires months of coordinated work across many files. However, most existing benchmarks focus predominantly on single-issue bug fixes from Python repositories, with coarse pass/fail evaluation outcomes, and thus fail to capture long-horizon, multi-target development at real engineering scale. To address this gap, we present RoadmapBench, a benchmark of 115 long-horizon coding tasks grounded in real open-source version upgrades across 17 repositories and 5 programming languages. Each task places the agent on a source-version code snapshot and provides a multi-target roadmap instruction requiring it to implement the functionality introduced in the target version, with a median modification of 3,700 lines across 51 files. We conduct a systematic evaluation on thirteen frontier models and find that even the strongest, Claude-Opus-4.7, resolves only 39.1% of tasks, while the weakest achieves merely 5.2%, in stark contrast to existing bug-fix benchmarks, suggesting that long-horizon software development remains a largely unsolved problem.

Kean Shi, Zihang Li, Tianyi Ma et al.

Computer-Using Agents (CUAs) are rapidly extending large language models (LLMs) beyond text-based reasoning toward action execution in more complex environments, such as web browsers and graphical user interfaces (GUIs). However, existing web and GUI agent benchmarks often rely on simplified settings, isolated tasks, or short-horizon interactions, making it difficult to assess capabilities of agents in realistic professional workflows. Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) environments are a natural choice for CUA evaluation, as they host a large share of modern digital work and naturally involve dynamic system states, cross-application coordination, domain-specific knowledge, and long-horizon dependencies. To this end, we introduce SaaS-Bench, a benchmark built on 23 deployable SaaS systems across six professional domains, containing 106 tasks grounded in realistic work scenarios. These tasks require long-horizon execution, cover both text-only and multimodal settings, and are evaluated with weighted verification checkpoints that measure strict task completion and partial progress. Experiments show that representative LLM-based agents struggle on SaaS-Bench, with even the strongest model completing fewer than 4% of tasks end-to-end, exposing limitations in planning, state tracking, cross-application context maintenance, and error recovery. Code are available at https://github.com/UniPat-AI/SaaS-Bench for reproduction.

Ziqun Chen, Ming Wu, Michael Heinrich et al.

Computation integrity of remote large language model (LLM) serving can be questionable. For conventional deep neural networks (DNNs), the existing TEE-shielded DNN partitioning (TSDP) approach uses Trusted Execution Environment (TEE) to compute non-linear components and verify the integrity of linear components offloaded to an untrusted GPU. However, directly applying TSDP to Transformer-based LLMs incurs significant TEE computation and TEE-GPU communication overhead. This paper presents Communication-efficient TEE-GPU Attention (\textsc{VeriAttn}) for accelerating verifiable LLM inference. \textsc{VeriAttn} offloads both linear and non-linear computations of attention to the GPU, while TEE performs verification. Moreover, for prefill, \textsc{VeriAttn} uses a two-level pipeline to overlap data movement, TEE pre-/post-processing, and GPU computation. For decoding, when the key-value cache exceeds available GPU memory, \textsc{VeriAttn} partitions attention across TEE and GPU to reduce repeated key-value transfers. Evaluation on an Intel TDX platform shows that \textsc{VeriAttn} achieves 2.60-3.38$\times$ and 3.86-5.42$\times$ acceleration over TSDP for 6k-token prompts and 10k-token outputs during prefill and decoding, respectively.

Xiang Liu, Sa Song, Zhaowei Zhang et al.

Consensus protocols form the backbone of distributed systems and blockchains, where implementation bugs can cause data corruption and financial losses. While LLM-based approaches show promise in code analysis, they struggle with deep protocol-level logic bugs involving complex state-dependent behaviors across multiple execution stages. We present Agora, a domain-aware multi-agent framework that integrates hypothesis-driven testing with LLM capabilities for systematic protocol verification. Agora employs specialized agents that collaboratively explore protocol state spaces, synthesize attack scenarios using domain-specific constraints, and validate findings through iterative refinement. This explicit role separation enables reasoning about global protocol invariants beyond single-function code analysis. We evaluate Agora on four consensus implementations (Raft, EPaxos, HotStuff, BullShark) using four state-of-the-art LLMs. Agora discovers 15 previously unknown protocol-level logic bugs that violate safety properties, while existing LLM-based agents fail to detect any such protocol-level logic bugs. Our results demonstrate that domain-aware multi-agent collaboration is essential for detecting deep logic bugs in complex protocols.