As the complexity of Software Engineering (SE) tasks continues to escalate, Multi-Agent Systems (MASs) have emerged as a focal point of research and practice due to their autonomy and scalability. Furthermore, through leveraging the reasoning and planning capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs), the application of LLM-based MASs in the field of SE is garnering increasing attention. However, there is no dedicated study that systematically explores the design of LLM-based MASs, including the Quality Attributes (QAs) on which designers mainly focus, the design patterns used by designers, and the rationale guiding the design of LLM-based MASs for SE tasks. To this end, we conducted a study to identify the QAs that LLM-based MASs for SE tasks focus on, the design patterns used in the MASs, and the design rationale for the MASs. We collected 94 papers on LLM-based MASs for SE tasks as the source. Our study shows that: (1) Code Generation is the most common SE task solved by LLM-based MASs among ten identified SE tasks, (2) Functional Suitability is the QA on which designers of LLM-based MASs pay the most attention, (3) Role-Based Cooperation is the design pattern most frequently employed among 16 patterns used to construct LLM-based MASs, and (4) Improving the Quality of Generated Code is the most common rationale behind the design of LLM-based MASs. Based on the study results, we presented the implications for the design of LLM-based MASs to support SE tasks.

Flawed planning from VLM-driven embodied agents poses significant safety hazards, hindering their deployment in real-world household tasks. However, existing static, non-interactive evaluation paradigms fail to adequately assess risks within these interactive environments, since they cannot simulate dynamic risks that emerge from an agent's actions and rely on unreliable post-hoc evaluations that ignore unsafe intermediate steps. To bridge this critical gap, we propose evaluating an agent's interactive safety: its ability to perceive emergent risks and execute mitigation steps in the correct procedural order. We thus present IS-Bench, the first multi-modal benchmark designed for interactive safety, featuring 161 challenging scenarios with 388 unique safety risks instantiated in a high-fidelity simulator. Crucially, it facilitates a novel process-oriented evaluation that verifies whether risk mitigation actions are performed before/after specific risk-prone steps. Extensive experiments on leading VLMs, including the GPT-4o and Gemini-2.5 series, reveal that current agents lack interactive safety awareness, and that while safety-aware Chain-of-Thought can improve performance, it often compromises task completion. By highlighting these critical limitations, IS-Bench provides a foundation for developing safer and more reliable embodied AI systems. Code and data are released under https://github.com/AI45Lab/IS-Bench.

The growing capabilities of large language models (LLMs) in instruction-following and context-understanding lead to the era of agents with numerous applications. Among these, task planning agents have become especially prominent in realistic scenarios involving complex internal pipelines, such as context understanding, tool management, and response generation. However, existing benchmarks predominantly evaluate agent performance based on task completion as a proxy for overall effectiveness. We hypothesize that merely improving task completion is misaligned with maximizing user satisfaction, as users interact with the entire agentic process and not only the end result. To address this gap, we propose AURA, an Agent-User inteRaction Assessment framework that conceptualizes the behavioral stages of interactive task planning agents. AURA offers a comprehensive assessment of agent through a set of atomic LLM evaluation criteria, allowing researchers and practitioners to diagnose specific strengths and weaknesses within the agent's decision-making pipeline. Our analyses show that agents excel in different behavioral stages, with user satisfaction shaped by both outcomes and intermediate behaviors. We also highlight future directions, including systems that leverage multiple agents and the limitations of user simulators in task planning.

Shimon Whiteson is a Professor of Computer Science at the University of Oxford and a Senior Staff Research Scientist at Waymo UK. His research focuses on deep reinforcement learning and imitation learning, with applications in robotics and video games. He completed his doctorate at the University of Texas at Austin in 2007. He spent eight years as an Assistant and then an Associate Professor at the University of Amsterdam before joining Oxford as an Associate Professor in 2015. His spin-out company Latent Logic was acquired by Waymo in 2019.

Generative models augmented with external tools and update mechanisms (or \textit{agents}) have demonstrated capabilities beyond intelligent prompting of base models. As agent use proliferates, dynamic multi-agent systems have naturally emerged. Recent work has investigated the theoretical and empirical properties of low-dimensional representations of agents based on query responses at a single time point. This paper introduces the Temporal Data Kernel Perspective Space (TDKPS), which jointly embeds agents across time, and proposes several novel hypothesis tests for detecting behavioral change at the agent- and group-level in black-box multi-agent systems. We characterize the empirical properties of our proposed tests, including their sensitivity to key hyperparameters, in simulations motivated by a multi-agent system of evolving digital personas. Finally, we demonstrate via natural experiment that our proposed tests detect changes that correlate sensitively, specifically, and significantly with a real exogenous event. As far as we are aware, TDKPS is the first principled framework for monitoring behavioral dynamics in black-box multi-agent systems -- a critical capability as generative agent deployment continues to scale.

As artificial intelligence (AI) agents are deployed across economic domains, understanding their strategic behavior and market-level impact becomes critical. This paper puts forward a groundbreaking new framework that is the first to capture the real-world economic forces that shape agentic labor markets: adverse selection, moral hazard, and reputation dynamics. Our framework encapsulates three core capabilities that successful LLM-agents will need: \textbf{metacognition} (accurate self-assessment of skills), \textbf{competitive awareness} (modeling rivals and market dynamics), and \textbf{long-horizon strategic planning}. We illustrate our framework through a tractable simulated gig economy where agentic Large Language Models (LLMs) compete for jobs, develop skills, and adapt their strategies under competitive pressure. Our simulations illustrate how LLM agents explicitly prompted with reasoning capabilities learn to strategically self-improve and demonstrate superior adaptability to changing market conditions. At the market level, our simulations reproduce classic macroeconomic phenomena found in human labor markets, while controlled experiments reveal potential AI-driven economic trends, such as rapid monopolization and systemic price deflation. This work provides a foundation to further explore the economic properties of AI-driven labour markets, and a conceptual framework to study the strategic reasoning capabilities in agents competing in the emerging economy.

The evolution of Large Language Models (LLMs) from passive responders to autonomous agents necessitates a fundamental shift in learning paradigms -- from static imitation to incentive-driven decision making. However, this transition is significantly impeded by the lack of scalable infrastructure capable of constructing high-quality interaction signals for effective policy learning. To address this, we introduce a comprehensive method designed to systematically scale the diversity and complexity of interactive environments. Our method realizes this scaling by addressing three orthogonal dimensions: (1) Complexity: NexAU, a flexible agent framework that supports building complex agent hierarchies via simple configurations; (2) Diversity: NexA4A automatically generates diverse agent hierarchies from natural language to cover infinite domains; and (3) Fidelity: NexGAP bridges the simulation-reality gap by integrating dynamic real-world environment for grounded trajectories synthesis. We train Nex-N1 upon the diverse and complex interactive environments established by our infrastructure. Empirical results on benchmarks such as SWE-bench and tau2 demonstrate that Nex-N1 consistently outperforms SOTA open-source models and achieves competitive performance against frontier proprietary models on complex agentic tasks. We open-source the Nex ecosystem and model weights to facilitate further research.

Multimodal Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems, particularly Vision-Language Models (VLMs), have become integral to critical applications ranging from autonomous decision-making to automated document processing. As these systems scale, they rely heavily on preprocessing pipelines to handle diverse inputs efficiently. However, this dependency on standard preprocessing operations, specifically image downscaling, creates a significant yet often overlooked security vulnerability. While intended for computational optimization, scaling algorithms can be exploited to conceal malicious visual prompts that are invisible to human observers but become active semantic instructions once processed by the model. Current adversarial strategies remain largely static, failing to account for the dynamic nature of modern agentic workflows. To address this gap, we propose Chameleon, a novel, adaptive adversarial framework designed to expose and exploit scaling vulnerabilities in production VLMs. Unlike traditional static attacks, Chameleon employs an iterative, agent-based optimization mechanism that dynamically refines image perturbations based on the target model's real-time feedback. This allows the framework to craft highly robust adversarial examples that survive standard downscaling operations to hijack downstream execution. We evaluate Chameleon against Gemini 2.5 Flash model. Our experiments demonstrate that Chameleon achieves an Attack Success Rate (ASR) of 84.5% across varying scaling factors, significantly outperforming static baseline attacks which average only 32.1%. Furthermore, we show that these attacks effectively compromise agentic pipelines, reducing decision-making accuracy by over 45% in multi-step tasks. Finally, we discuss the implications of these vulnerabilities and propose multi-scale consistency checks as a necessary defense mechanism.

Artificial intelligence systems are increasingly deployed in biomedical research. However, current evaluation frameworks may inadequately assess their effectiveness as research collaborators. This rapid review examines benchmarking practices for AI systems in preclinical biomedical research. Three major databases and two preprint servers were searched from January 1, 2018 to October 31, 2025, identifying 14 benchmarks that assess AI capabilities in literature understanding, experimental design, and hypothesis generation. The results revealed that all current benchmarks assess isolated component capabilities, including data analysis quality, hypothesis validity, and experimental protocol design. However, authentic research collaboration requires integrated workflows spanning multiple sessions, with contextual memory, adaptive dialogue, and constraint propagation. This gap implies that systems excelling on component benchmarks may fail as practical research co-pilots. A process-oriented evaluation framework is proposed that addresses four critical dimensions absent from current benchmarks: dialogue quality, workflow orchestration, session continuity, and researcher experience. These dimensions are essential for evaluating AI systems as research co-pilots rather than as isolated task executors.

Agentic AI systems, software agents with autonomy, decision-making ability, and adaptability, are increasingly used to execute complex tasks on behalf of organisations. Most such systems rely on Large Language Models (LLMs), whose broad semantic capabilities enable powerful language processing but lack explicit, institution-specific grounding. In enterprises, data rarely comes with an inspectable semantic layer, and constructing one typically requires labour-intensive "data archaeology": cleaning, modelling, and curating knowledge into ontologies, taxonomies, and other formal structures. At the same time, explainability methods such as saliency maps expose an "interpretability gap": they highlight what the model attends to but not why, leaving decision processes opaque. In this preprint, we present a case study, developed by Kaiasm and Avantra AI through their work with The Turing Way Practitioners Hub, a forum developed under the InnovateUK BridgeAI program. This study presents a collaborative human-AI approach to building an inspectable semantic layer for Agentic AI. AI agents first propose candidate knowledge structures from diverse data sources; domain experts then validate, correct, and extend these structures, with their feedback used to improve subsequent models. Authors show how this process captures tacit institutional knowledge, improves response quality and efficiency, and mitigates institutional amnesia. We argue for a shift from post-hoc explanation to justifiable Agentic AI, where decisions are grounded in explicit, inspectable evidence and reasoning accessible to both experts and non-specialists.