84 / 90

Day 84: 综合与评估复习 —— 科学化 Agent 评测

巩固本单元:凭记忆提取协议与指标概念、重算可核验数字、组装四语言评测报告。

智能体工程与科学评测 480 分钟有效研习(8 小时)
01 120 分钟

综合复习:证据种类、预注册与基线纪律

Agent 辅助工程检查

前置要求

Day 83 的解读备忘。

学习目标

在翻看笔记之前,凭记忆提取本单元核心区分——确定性夹具证据与受阻在线证据、预注册与事后编故事、结果指标与工具行为指标。

操作指引

1. 检索练习:凭记忆写出四个指标族、六个契约任务 ID,以及 evidence_kind 为 deterministic 与 live 的区别。
2. 对照 live_eval_contract.json 自查回忆结果,把每一处遗漏记入追赶计划。
3. 用一段话概括 blocked-awaiting-authorization 状态:存在什么(确定性运行、契约、校验器),不存在什么(任何在线测量值)。
4. 解释为什么基线纪律——先冻结任务集、基线与假设——是本单元的核心习惯。

自主演练与记录

撰写 recall_log.md:凭记忆列出四个指标族、全部六个任务 ID、确定性对在线的证据规则,然后对照契约自评。

独立掌握标准

凭记忆准确复现单元核心概念,并诚实记录缺口。

权威源资源与权利证明

linking Open Access / CC BY 4.0

AgentBench: Evaluating LLMs as Agents

作者 / 机构: Xiao Liu, Hao Yu, Hanchen Zhang, Yifan Xu, Xuanyu Lei, Hanyu Lai, Yu Gu, Hangliang Ding, Kaiwen Men, Kejuan Yang, et al. | 原始出处链接 ↗

对应章节 / 时间戳: Section 4.1 Evaluation Setup and Section 4.3 Analysis

验证版本与日期: ICLR 2024 / arXiv:2308.03688v2 (Verified: 2026-10-30)

入选理由:

First systematic multi-environment benchmark measuring LLM-as-agent ability across eight interactive settings, establishing fixed task suites, environment-specific scoring, and comparable evaluation conventions.

来源前置条件:

LLM prompting, tool-use environments, and multi-step task decomposition.

安全回退方案(离线弹性):

The curriculum fixes its own six-task evaluation suite with deterministic-v1 fixture analogs, so all protocol-design practice runs offline without reproducing AgentBench environments.

对比候选资源与选型分析 (2)

Real computer-control benchmark for open-ended desktop tasks; AgentBench covers a wider environment spectrum for foundational evaluation design.

Mind2Web: Towards a Generalist Agent for the Web ↗ compared_alternative [Open Access]

Generalist web-agent benchmark with 2,350 tasks; AgentBench provides broader multi-domain coverage for studying evaluation protocol design.

linking Open Access / CC BY 4.0

SWE-bench: Can Language Models Resolve Real-World GitHub Issues?

作者 / 机构: Carlos E. Jimenez, John Yang, Alexander Wettig, Shunyu Yao, Kexin Pei, Ofir Press, Karthik R. Narasimhan | 原始出处链接 ↗

对应章节 / 时间戳: N/A

验证版本与日期: ICLR 2024 / arXiv:2310.06770v3 (Verified: 2026-10-30)

入选理由:

Defines the standard pattern this block teaches: a bounded issue statement paired with executable fail-to-pass tests as verifiable acceptance criteria for agent-produced changes.

来源前置条件:

Unit testing, issue descriptions, and repository evaluation vocabulary.

安全回退方案(离线弹性):

The acceptance-criteria pattern is exercised locally through the Ticket 22 fixture scorer and the Ticket 24 regression exercise without external datasets.

对比候选资源与选型分析 (2)
HumanEval: Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Code ↗ compared_alternative [arXiv non-exclusive license / Open Access]

Function-level synthesis benchmark; SWE-bench models the repository-scoped issue-to-diff workflow that this delivery block rehearses.

Multi-SWE-bench: A Multilingual Benchmark for Issue Resolving ↗ compared_alternative [Open Access / CC BY 4.0]

Extends issue resolution to multiple programming languages; the original Python-centric SWE-bench provides a cleaner pedagogical anchor.

02 120 分钟

指标重算操练:从原始轨迹到可核验数字

独立掌握检查(无 AI 辅助)

前置要求

Day 84 Activity 1 的回忆日志。

学习目标

从原始记录产物——夹具报告、action/observation 轨迹与计数器——重算全部契约指标,证明每个数字都可被独立核验。

操作指引

1. 重跑确定性基线命令,对生成的 report.txt 做哈希,与契约中的 expected_report_sha256 比对。
2. 逐条走查 action/observation 轨迹:核验每个 action 名都在 allowed_tools 中、每个 arguments 载荷都是 JSON 对象。
3. 用已记录的步数与重试计数器对照声明上限,重算预算合规性。
4. 核验失败处理:每个失败的 observation 都带结构化错误值,termination_reason 诚实。
5. 记录重算笔记:每个指标的输入产物、所做检查、结果。

自主演练与记录

产出 recomputation_notes.md,把四个指标逐一映射到来源产物、所做检查与重算值。

独立掌握标准

从原始产物重算全部四个指标,并给出每个数字的证据链。

权威源资源与权利证明

linking Open Access / CC BY 4.0

tau-bench: A Benchmark for Tool-Agent-User Interaction in Real-World Domains

作者 / 机构: Shunyu Yao, Noah Shinn, Pedram Razavi, Karthik Narasimhan | 原始出处链接 ↗

对应章节 / 时间戳: Section 3 τ-bench: A benchmark for Tool-Agent-User Interaction (pass^k definition); Section 4.2 Key Characteristics; Section 5 Experiments (pass^k results)

验证版本与日期: ICLR 2025 / arXiv:2406.12045v2 (Verified: 2026-10-30)

入选理由:

Introduces pass^k consistency metrics and database-state outcome checks for tool-agent-user interaction, separating reliable task completion from single lucky runs.

来源前置条件:

Tool-calling APIs, conversational agents, and policy-following evaluation.

安全回退方案(离线弹性):

Consistency metrics and state-based outcome checking are re-implemented on the curriculum deterministic fixture for offline practice.

对比候选资源与选型分析 (2)

Stateful tool-use evaluation with milestone events; tau-bench additionally models a simulated user and reports pass^k reliability.

Berkeley Function-Calling Leaderboard (BFCL) ↗ compared_alternative [Apache 2.0 (Gorilla project)]

Live leaderboard for function-call correctness across languages and parallel calls; tau-bench adds policy adherence and multi-trial consistency.

linking arXiv non-exclusive license / Open Access

WebArena: A Realistic Web Environment for Building Autonomous Agents

作者 / 机构: Shuyan Zhou, Frank F. Xu, Hao Zhu, Xuhui Zhou, Robert Lo, Abishek Sridhar, Xianyi Cheng, Tianyue Ou, Yonatan Bisk, Daniel Fried, Uri Alon, Graham Neubig | 原始出处链接 ↗

对应章节 / 时间戳: Section 3.2 Evaluation Annotation (functional correctness checks)

验证版本与日期: ICLR 2024 / arXiv:2307.13854v4 (Verified: 2026-10-30)

入选理由:

Defines reproducible web tasks scored by functional outcome rather than reference-string matching, grounding observable action/observation evidence for agent evaluation.

来源前置条件:

Web navigation, browser action spaces, and functional correctness checking.

安全回退方案(离线弹性):

The curriculum records action/observation traces on its own deterministic fixture, reproducing outcome-check discipline without hosting web environments.

对比候选资源与选型分析 (2)

Enterprise-workflow web benchmark; WebArena offers broader self-hosted site diversity for foundational protocol study.

Extends WebArena to visual grounding; WebArena remains the base reference for action-space and functional scoring design.

03 120 分钟

四语言科学评测报告组装

Agent 辅助工程检查

前置要求

Day 84 Activity 2 的重算笔记。

学习目标

组装本单元四语言评测报告:协议、基线重算、混杂变量、失败分类、成本核算与声明的不主张事项。

操作指引

1. 汇总产物:eval_protocol.md、baseline_ledger.json、confounder_register.md、failure_taxonomy.json、cost_ledger.csv、memo.md。
2. 填写四语言报告模板(英语、日语、简体中文、繁体中文),各版数字与主张完全一致。
3. 校验各版术语一致:预注册、基线、混杂、失败归因、终止诚实性、证据种类的译法前后一致。
4. 确认报告在四种语言中同样写明 blocked-awaiting-authorization 与 null 在线值;任何版本都不得悄悄夸大证据。

自主演练与记录

发布四语言科学评测报告;核验每个版本载有相同指标、相同 null 在线值与相同不主张事项。

独立掌握标准

交付指标一致性已核验的四语言报告,无任何版本夸大证据。

权威源资源与权利证明

linking MIT

OpenAI Evals: Framework for Evaluating LLMs and Contamination Checks

作者 / 机构: OpenAI Research | 原始出处链接 ↗

对应章节 / 时间戳: README sections 'Running evals' and 'Writing evals'

验证版本与日期: OpenAI Evals Repository (Verified: 2026-10-30)

入选理由:

Standardized evaluation repository specifying rigorous separation of eval prompts, canary GUID strings, and contamination test protocols.

来源前置条件:

Python, evaluation harnesses (MMLU, GSM8K), JSONL datasets.

安全回退方案(离线弹性):

Canary GUID matching, token set intersection, and leak detection scripts are implemented in the curriculum.

对比候选资源与选型分析 (2)
EleutherAI LM Evaluation Harness ↗ compared_alternative [MIT]

Widely adopted evaluation harness; OpenAI Evals provides explicit canary guidance and contamination check specifications.

Hugging Face Lighteval ↗ compared_alternative [MIT]

Modern lightweight eval framework; OpenAI Evals illustrates standard test-set integrity guarantees.

linking Open Access / CC BY 4.0

AgentBench: Evaluating LLMs as Agents

作者 / 机构: Xiao Liu, Hao Yu, Hanchen Zhang, Yifan Xu, Xuanyu Lei, Hanyu Lai, Yu Gu, Hangliang Ding, Kaiwen Men, Kejuan Yang, et al. | 原始出处链接 ↗

对应章节 / 时间戳: Section 4.1 Evaluation Setup and Section 4.3 Analysis

验证版本与日期: ICLR 2024 / arXiv:2308.03688v2 (Verified: 2026-10-30)

入选理由:

First systematic multi-environment benchmark measuring LLM-as-agent ability across eight interactive settings, establishing fixed task suites, environment-specific scoring, and comparable evaluation conventions.

来源前置条件:

LLM prompting, tool-use environments, and multi-step task decomposition.

安全回退方案(离线弹性):

The curriculum fixes its own six-task evaluation suite with deterministic-v1 fixture analogs, so all protocol-design practice runs offline without reproducing AgentBench environments.

对比候选资源与选型分析 (2)

Real computer-control benchmark for open-ended desktop tasks; AgentBench covers a wider environment spectrum for foundational evaluation design.

Mind2Web: Towards a Generalist Agent for the Web ↗ compared_alternative [Open Access]

Generalist web-agent benchmark with 2,350 tasks; AgentBench provides broader multi-domain coverage for studying evaluation protocol design.

04 120 分钟

综合与评估复习:Agent 评测掌握检查与追赶计划

独立掌握检查(无 AI 辅助)

前置要求

Day 84 Activities 1-3。

学习目标

完成单元巩固:通过掌握检查,把每个已记录缺口转为间隔复习项,并认证学习证据诚实完整。

操作指引

1. 完成独立掌握检查,范围:预注册纪律、四个指标族、证据种类、混杂控制、失败归因、null 在线值。
2. 对每个失分点创建间隔复习条目:概念名、需重学的产物、计划复习日。
3. 核验掌握检查结果、自我勾选完成与观察到的测试证据分别记录——自报永远不能顶替观察结果。
4. 认证证据包:协议、台账、备忘、报告均引用实际产物,并诚实承担 blocked-awaiting-authorization 状态。

自主演练与记录

提交 mastery_check_record.json:检查结果、逐缺口的间隔复习清单,以及“报告中的每个数字都可追溯至重算产物”的认证。

独立掌握标准

以诚实的掌握记录收尾:缺口已记录、复习已排期、证据已认证。

权威源资源与权利证明

linking Open Access / CC BY 4.0

SWE-bench: Can Language Models Resolve Real-World GitHub Issues?

作者 / 机构: Carlos E. Jimenez, John Yang, Alexander Wettig, Shunyu Yao, Kexin Pei, Ofir Press, Karthik R. Narasimhan | 原始出处链接 ↗

对应章节 / 时间戳: N/A

验证版本与日期: ICLR 2024 / arXiv:2310.06770v3 (Verified: 2026-10-30)

入选理由:

Defines the standard pattern this block teaches: a bounded issue statement paired with executable fail-to-pass tests as verifiable acceptance criteria for agent-produced changes.

来源前置条件:

Unit testing, issue descriptions, and repository evaluation vocabulary.

安全回退方案(离线弹性):

The acceptance-criteria pattern is exercised locally through the Ticket 22 fixture scorer and the Ticket 24 regression exercise without external datasets.

对比候选资源与选型分析 (2)
HumanEval: Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Code ↗ compared_alternative [arXiv non-exclusive license / Open Access]

Function-level synthesis benchmark; SWE-bench models the repository-scoped issue-to-diff workflow that this delivery block rehearses.

Multi-SWE-bench: A Multilingual Benchmark for Issue Resolving ↗ compared_alternative [Open Access / CC BY 4.0]

Extends issue resolution to multiple programming languages; the original Python-centric SWE-bench provides a cleaner pedagogical anchor.

linking Open Access / CC BY 4.0

tau-bench: A Benchmark for Tool-Agent-User Interaction in Real-World Domains

作者 / 机构: Shunyu Yao, Noah Shinn, Pedram Razavi, Karthik Narasimhan | 原始出处链接 ↗

对应章节 / 时间戳: Section 3 τ-bench: A benchmark for Tool-Agent-User Interaction (pass^k definition); Section 4.2 Key Characteristics; Section 5 Experiments (pass^k results)

验证版本与日期: ICLR 2025 / arXiv:2406.12045v2 (Verified: 2026-10-30)

入选理由:

Introduces pass^k consistency metrics and database-state outcome checks for tool-agent-user interaction, separating reliable task completion from single lucky runs.

来源前置条件:

Tool-calling APIs, conversational agents, and policy-following evaluation.

安全回退方案(离线弹性):

Consistency metrics and state-based outcome checking are re-implemented on the curriculum deterministic fixture for offline practice.

对比候选资源与选型分析 (2)

Stateful tool-use evaluation with milestone events; tau-bench additionally models a simulated user and reports pass^k reliability.

Berkeley Function-Calling Leaderboard (BFCL) ↗ compared_alternative [Apache 2.0 (Gorilla project)]

Live leaderboard for function-call correctness across languages and parallel calls; tau-bench adds policy adherence and multi-trial consistency.