T propose o address a no the vel challenge Agent-as-a-Judge of evaluating framew time-v ork. Our arying method and construct complex s answers, task-specific we judg answer of ten e a frontier g correctness ents based agentic and on a search source tree-structured systems attribution.

Agentic search such as Deep Research systems-where agents autonomously browse the web, synthesize information, and return comprehensive citation-backed answers-represents a major shift in how users interact with web-scale information. While promising greater efficiency and cognitive offloading, the growing complexity and open-endedness of agentic search have outpaced existing evaluation benchmarks and methodologies, which largely assume short search horizons and static answers. In this paper, we introduce Mind2Web 2, a benchmark of 130 realistic, high-quality, and long-horizon tasks that require real-time web browsing and extensive information synthesis, constructed with over 1000 hours of human labor. To address the challenge of evaluating time-varying and complex answers, we propose a novel Agent-as-a-Judge framework. Our method constructs task-specific judge agents based on a tree-structured rubric design to automatically assess both answer correctness and source attribution. We conduct a comprehensive evaluation of ten frontier agentic search systems and human performance, along with a detailed error analysis to draw insights for future development. The best-performing system, OpenAI Deep Research, can already achieve 50-70% of human performance while spending half the time, highlighting its great potential. Altogether, Mind2Web 2 provides a rigorous foundation for developing and benchmarking the next generation of agentic search systems.

Deep Research Agents (DRAs) can autonomously conduct complex investigations and generate comprehensive reports, demonstrating strong real-world potential. However, existing benchmarks primarily evaluate DRAs on generic quality metrics and overlook personalization, a critical dimension for individual users. However, existing evaluations mostly rely on close-ended benchmarks, while open-ended deep research benchmarks remain scarce and typically neglect personalized scenarios. To bridge this gap, we introduce Personalized Deep Research Bench (PDR-Bench), the first benchmark for evaluating personalization in DRAs. It pairs 50 diverse research tasks across 10 domains with 25 authentic user profiles that combine structured persona attributes with dynamic real-world contexts, yielding 250 realistic user-task queries. To assess system performance, we propose the PQR Evaluation Framework, which jointly measures Personalization Alignment, Content Quality, and Factual Reliability. Our experiments on a range of systems highlight current capabilities and limitations in handling personalized deep research. This work establishes a rigorous foundation for developing and evaluating the next generation of truly personalized AI research assistants.

Deep research -- producing comprehensive, citation-grounded reports by searching and synthesizing information from hundreds of live web sources -- marks an important frontier for agentic systems. To rigorously evaluate this ability, four principles are essential: tasks should be (1) user-centric, reflecting realistic information needs, (2) dynamic, requiring up-to-date information beyond parametric knowledge, (3) unambiguous, ensuring consistent interpretation across users, and (4) multi-faceted and search-intensive, requiring search over numerous web sources and in-depth analysis. Existing benchmarks fall short of these principles, often focusing on narrow domains or posing ambiguous questions that hinder fair comparison. Guided by these principles, we introduce LiveResearchBench, a benchmark of 100 expert-curated tasks spanning daily life, enterprise, and academia, each requiring extensive, dynamic, real-time web search and synthesis. Built with over 1,500 hours of human labor, LiveResearchBench provides a rigorous basis for systematic evaluation. To evaluate citation-grounded long-form reports, we introduce DeepEval, a comprehensive suite covering both content- and report-level quality, including coverage, presentation, citation accuracy and association, consistency and depth of analysis. DeepEval integrates four complementary evaluation protocols, each designed to ensure stable assessment and high agreement with human judgments. Using LiveResearchBench and DeepEval, we conduct a comprehensive evaluation of 17 frontier deep research systems, including single-agent web search, single-agent deep research, and multi-agent systems. Our analysis reveals current strengths, recurring failure modes, and key system components needed to advance reliable, insightful deep research. Our code is available at: https://github.com/SalesforceAIResearch/LiveResearchBench.

Large language models are evolving from single-turn responders into tool-using agents capable of sustained reasoning and decision-making for deep research. Prevailing systems adopt a linear pipeline of plan to search to write to a report, which suffers from error accumulation and context rot due to the lack of explicit control over both model behavior and context. We introduce RhinoInsight, a deep research framework that adds two control mechanisms to enhance robustness, traceability, and overall quality without parameter updates. First, a Verifiable Checklist module transforms user requirements into traceable and verifiable sub-goals, incorporates human or LLM critics for refinement, and compiles a hierarchical outline to anchor subsequent actions and prevent non-executable planning. Second, an Evidence Audit module structures search content, iteratively updates the outline, and prunes noisy context, while a critic ranks and binds high-quality evidence to drafted content to ensure verifiability and reduce hallucinations. Our experiments demonstrate that RhinoInsight achieves state-of-the-art performance on deep research tasks while remaining competitive on deep search tasks.

Public health agencies face critical challenges in identifying high-risk neighborhoods for childhood lead exposure with limited resources for outreach and intervention programs. To address this, we develop a Priority Score integrating untested children proportions, elevated blood lead prevalence, and public health coverage patterns to support optimized resource allocation decisions across 136 neighborhoods in Chicago, New York City, and Washington, D.C. We leverage these allocation tasks, which require integrating multiple vulnerability indicators and interpreting empirical evidence, to evaluate whether large language models (LLMs) with agentic reasoning and deep research capabilities can effectively allocate public health resources when presented with structured allocation scenarios. LLMs were tasked with distributing 1,000 test kits within each city based on neighborhood vulnerability indicators. Results reveal significant limitations: LLMs frequently overlooked neighborhoods with highest lead prevalence and largest proportions of untested children, such as West Englewood in Chicago, while allocating disproportionate resources to lower-priority areas like Hunts Point in New York City. Overall accuracy averaged 0.46, reaching a maximum of 0.66 with ChatGPT 5 Deep Research. Despite their marketed deep research capabilities, LLMs struggled with fundamental limitations in information retrieval and evidence-based reasoning, frequently citing outdated data and allowing non-empirical narratives about neighborhood conditions to override quantitative vulnerability indicators.

Deep Research (DR) is an emerging agent application that leverages large language models (LLMs) to address open-ended queries. It requires the integration of several capabilities, including multi-step reasoning, cross-document synthesis, and the generation of evidence-backed, long-form answers. Evaluating DR remains challenging because responses are lengthy and diverse, admit many valid solutions, and often depend on dynamic information sources. We introduce ResearchRubrics, a standardized benchmark for DR built with over 2,800+ hours of human labor that pairs realistic, domain-diverse prompts with 2,500+ expert-written, fine-grained rubrics to assess factual grounding, reasoning soundness, and clarity. We also propose a new complexity framework for categorizing DR tasks along three axes: conceptual breadth, logical nesting, and exploration. In addition, we develop human and model-based evaluation protocols that measure rubric adherence for DR agents. We evaluate several state-of-the-art DR systems and find that even leading agents like Gemini's DR and OpenAI's DR achieve under 68% average compliance with our rubrics, primarily due to missed implicit context and inadequate reasoning about retrieved information. Our results highlight the need for robust, scalable assessment of deep research capabilities, to which end we release ResearchRubrics(including all prompts, rubrics, and evaluation code) to facilitate progress toward well-justified research assistants.

As information grows exponentially, enterprises face increasing pressure to transform unstructured data into coherent, actionable insights. While autonomous agents show promise, they often struggle with domain-specific nuances, intent alignment, and enterprise integration. We present Enterprise Deep Research (EDR), a multi-agent system that integrates (1) a Master Planning Agent for adaptive query decomposition, (2) four specialized search agents (General, Academic, GitHub, LinkedIn), (3) an extensible MCP-based tool ecosystem supporting NL2SQL, file analysis, and enterprise workflows, (4) a Visualization Agent for data-driven insights, and (5) a reflection mechanism that detects knowledge gaps and updates research direction with optional human-in-the-loop steering guidance. These components enable automated report generation, real-time streaming, and seamless enterprise deployment, as validated on internal datasets. On open-ended benchmarks including DeepResearch Bench and DeepConsult, EDR outperforms state-of-the-art agentic systems without any human steering. We release the EDR framework and benchmark trajectories to advance research on multi-agent reasoning applications. Code at https://github.com/SalesforceAIResearch/enterprise-deep-research and Dataset at https://huggingface.co/datasets/Salesforce/EDR-200

Deep Research systems have revolutionized how LLMs solve complex questions through iterative reasoning and evidence gathering. However, current systems remain fundamentally constrained to textual web data, overlooking the vast knowledge embedded in multimodal documents Processing such documents demands sophisticated parsing to preserve visual semantics (figures, tables, charts, and equations), intelligent chunking to maintain structural coherence, and adaptive retrieval across modalities, which are capabilities absent in existing systems. In response, we present Doc-Researcher, a unified system that bridges this gap through three integrated components: (i) deep multimodal parsing that preserves layout structure and visual semantics while creating multi-granular representations from chunk to document level, (ii) systematic retrieval architecture supporting text-only, vision-only, and hybrid paradigms with dynamic granularity selection, and (iii) iterative multi-agent workflows that decompose complex queries, progressively accumulate evidence, and synthesize comprehensive answers across documents and modalities. To enable rigorous evaluation, we introduce M4DocBench, the first benchmark for Multi-modal, Multi-hop, Multi-document, and Multi-turn deep research. Featuring 158 expert-annotated questions with complete evidence chains across 304 documents, M4DocBench tests capabilities that existing benchmarks cannot assess. Experiments demonstrate that Doc-Researcher achieves 50.6% accuracy, 3.4xbetter than state-of-the-art baselines, validating that effective document research requires not just better retrieval, but fundamentally deep parsing that preserve multimodal integrity and support iterative research. Our work establishes a new paradigm for conducting deep research on multimodal document collections.

Deep Research (DR) agents built on Large Language Models (LLMs) can perform complex, multi-step research by decomposing tasks, retrieving online information, and synthesizing detailed reports. However, the misuse of LLMs with such powerful capabilities can lead to even greater risks. This is especially concerning in high-stakes and knowledge-intensive domains such as biosecurity, where DR can generate a professional report containing detailed forbidden knowledge. Unfortunately, we have found such risks in practice: simply submitting a harmful query, which a standalone LLM directly rejects, can elicit a detailed and dangerous report from DR agents. This highlights the elevated risks and underscores the need for a deeper safety analysis. Yet, jailbreak methods designed for LLMs fall short in exposing such unique risks, as they do not target the research ability of DR agents. To address this gap, we propose two novel jailbreak strategies: Plan Injection, which injects malicious sub-goals into the agent's plan; and Intent Hijack, which reframes harmful queries as academic research questions. We conducted extensive experiments across different LLMs and various safety benchmarks, including general and biosecurity forbidden prompts. These experiments reveal 3 key findings: (1) Alignment of the LLMs often fail in DR agents, where harmful prompts framed in academic terms can hijack agent intent; (2) Multi-step planning and execution weaken the alignment, revealing systemic vulnerabilities that prompt-level safeguards cannot address; (3) DR agents not only bypass refusals but also produce more coherent, professional, and dangerous content, compared with standalone LLMs. These results demonstrate a fundamental misalignment in DR agents and call for better alignment techniques tailored to DR agents. Code and datasets are available at https://chenxshuo.github.io/deeper-harm.