GTA: A Benchmark for General Tool Agents
0
Sign in to get full access
Overview
- This paper presents the GTA (General Tool Agents) benchmark, a new framework for evaluating the general tool use capabilities of AI agents.
- The benchmark consists of a set of diverse tasks that require agents to use a variety of tools to accomplish goals, testing their ability to reason about tool selection, tool usage, and tool combination.
- The paper also introduces a baseline model for the GTA benchmark and provides results demonstrating the challenges of the benchmark for current AI systems.
Plain English Explanation
The researchers have created a new test called the GTA benchmark to evaluate how well AI systems can use different tools to accomplish tasks. In the real world, humans are very skilled at using a wide variety of tools, like hammers, screwdrivers, or computers, to solve problems. But current AI systems struggle with this kind of flexible tool use.
The GTA benchmark presents AI agents with a diverse set of tasks that require using different tools in the right way. For example, an agent might need to use a wrench to tighten a bolt, then use a saw to cut a piece of wood, and finally use a computer to write a report. The benchmark tests the agent's ability to reason about which tool to use, how to use it properly, and how to combine multiple tools to achieve a goal.
By testing AI systems on the GTA benchmark, the researchers hope to drive progress towards more versatile and capable AI agents that can flexibly use tools like humans can. This could be important for building AI assistants that can help us with a wide variety of everyday tasks around the home or workplace.
Technical Explanation
The GTA benchmark consists of a set of diverse tasks that require agents to use a variety of tools to accomplish goals. The tasks cover a broad range of domains, including construction, repair, cooking, and office work. Each task presents the agent with a set of available tools and a goal to achieve, and the agent must reason about which tools to use, how to use them properly, and how to combine multiple tools to complete the task.
The paper introduces a baseline model for the GTA benchmark, which consists of a neural network agent that uses a modular architecture to reason about tool selection and usage. The agent takes in observations of the task environment and available tools, and outputs a sequence of actions to complete the task. The authors evaluate this baseline model on a set of GTA tasks and find that it struggles to achieve high performance, highlighting the challenges of the benchmark for current AI systems.
The paper also discusses the relationship between the GTA benchmark and other AI benchmarks, such as ML-Bench, GameBench, DollarTauDollar, and Planning Benchmark. While these benchmarks focus on specific skills like language understanding, strategic reasoning, or planning, the GTA benchmark aims to evaluate agents' general tool use capabilities, which are crucial for building versatile AI assistants.
Critical Analysis
The GTA benchmark represents an important step towards more comprehensive evaluation of AI systems' practical problem-solving abilities. By focusing on tool use, the benchmark tests a core cognitive capability that is essential for many real-world tasks. However, the paper acknowledges several limitations and challenges:
- The benchmark tasks may still be relatively simple compared to the full complexity of human tool use in the real world. Extending the benchmark to more open-ended, naturalistic environments could further test agents' flexibility and adaptability.
- The current baseline model struggles to achieve high performance, suggesting that significant advances in AI architectures and training techniques may be needed to master the GTA benchmark.
- Evaluating tool use in simulation may not fully capture the challenges of real-world tool interaction, such as dexterity, physical constraints, and perceptual ambiguity.
Addressing these limitations and continuing to push the boundaries of tool-based AI evaluation will be important future directions for this line of research. As the GTA benchmark and similar benchmarks advance, they could play a crucial role in driving progress towards more capable and versatile AI systems that can seamlessly integrate into human environments and workflows.
Conclusion
The GTA benchmark represents an important new framework for evaluating the general tool use capabilities of AI agents. By presenting a diverse set of tasks that require flexible reasoning about tool selection, usage, and combination, the benchmark aims to drive progress towards more versatile and capable AI systems.
The baseline model introduced in the paper demonstrates the challenges of the benchmark for current AI, highlighting the need for continued advancements in areas like modular architecture design, reasoning about tool affordances, and task planning. As the GTA benchmark and related benchmarks advance, they could play a crucial role in shaping the development of AI systems that can truly collaborate with humans in complex, tool-rich environments.
This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!
Related Papers
0
GTA: A Benchmark for General Tool Agents
Jize Wang, Zerun Ma, Yining Li, Songyang Zhang, Cailian Chen, Kai Chen, Xinyi Le
Significant focus has been placed on integrating large language models (LLMs) with various tools in developing general-purpose agents. This poses a challenge to LLMs' tool-use capabilities. However, there are evident gaps between existing tool-use evaluations and real-world scenarios. Current evaluations often use AI-generated queries, single-step tasks, dummy tools, and text-only interactions, failing to reveal the agents' real-world problem-solving abilities effectively. To address this, we propose GTA, a benchmark for General Tool Agents, featuring three main aspects: (i) Real user queries: human-written queries with simple real-world objectives but implicit tool-use, requiring the LLM to reason the suitable tools and plan the solution steps. (ii) Real deployed tools: an evaluation platform equipped with tools across perception, operation, logic, and creativity categories to evaluate the agents' actual task execution performance. (iii) Real multimodal inputs: authentic image files, such as spatial scenes, web page screenshots, tables, code snippets, and printed/handwritten materials, used as the query contexts to align with real-world scenarios closely. We design 229 real-world tasks and executable tool chains to evaluate mainstream LLMs. Our findings show that real-world user queries are challenging for existing LLMs, with GPT-4 completing less than 50% of the tasks and most LLMs achieving below 25%. This evaluation reveals the bottlenecks in the tool-use capabilities of current LLMs in real-world scenarios, which provides future direction for advancing general-purpose tool agents. The code and dataset are available at https://github.com/open-compass/GTA.
Read more7/12/2024
🎯
0
Evaluating Tool-Augmented Agents in Remote Sensing Platforms
Simranjit Singh, Michael Fore, Dimitrios Stamoulis
Tool-augmented Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown impressive capabilities in remote sensing (RS) applications. However, existing benchmarks assume question-answering input templates over predefined image-text data pairs. These standalone instructions neglect the intricacies of realistic user-grounded tasks. Consider a geospatial analyst: they zoom in a map area, they draw a region over which to collect satellite imagery, and they succinctly ask Detect all objects here. Where is `here`, if it is not explicitly hardcoded in the image-text template, but instead is implied by the system state, e.g., the live map positioning? To bridge this gap, we present GeoLLM-QA, a benchmark designed to capture long sequences of verbal, visual, and click-based actions on a real UI platform. Through in-depth evaluation of state-of-the-art LLMs over a diverse set of 1,000 tasks, we offer insights towards stronger agents for RS applications.
Read more5/3/2024
0
SimulBench: Evaluating Language Models with Creative Simulation Tasks
Qi Jia, Xiang Yue, Tianyu Zheng, Jie Huang, Bill Yuchen Lin
We introduce SimulBench, a benchmark designed to evaluate large language models (LLMs) across a diverse collection of creative simulation scenarios, such as acting as a Linux terminal or playing text games with users. While these simulation tasks serve as effective measures of an LLM's general intelligence, they are seldom incorporated into existing benchmarks. A major challenge is to develop an evaluation framework for testing different LLMs fairly while preserving the multi-round interactive nature of simulation tasks between users and AI. To tackle this issue, we suggest using a fixed LLM as a user agent to engage with an LLM to collect dialogues first under different tasks. Then, challenging dialogue scripts are extracted for evaluating different target LLMs. To facilitate automatic assessment on DataName{}, GPT-4 is employed as the evaluator, tasked with reviewing the quality of the final response generated by the target LLMs given multi-turn dialogue scripts. Our comprehensive experiments indicate that these simulation tasks continue to pose a significant challenge with their unique natures and show the gap between proprietary models and the most advanced open LLMs. For example, GPT-4-turbo outperforms LLaMA-3-70b-Chat on 18.55% more cases.
Read more9/14/2024
💬
0
ML-Bench: Evaluating Large Language Models and Agents for Machine Learning Tasks on Repository-Level Code
Xiangru Tang, Yuliang Liu, Zefan Cai, Yanjun Shao, Junjie Lu, Yichi Zhang, Zexuan Deng, Helan Hu, Kaikai An, Ruijun Huang, Shuzheng Si, Sheng Chen, Haozhe Zhao, Liang Chen, Yan Wang, Tianyu Liu, Zhiwei Jiang, Baobao Chang, Yin Fang, Yujia Qin, Wangchunshu Zhou, Yilun Zhao, Arman Cohan, Mark Gerstein
Despite Large Language Models (LLMs) like GPT-4 achieving impressive results in function-level code generation, they struggle with repository-scale code understanding (e.g., coming up with the right arguments for calling routines), requiring a deeper comprehension of complex file interactions. Also, recently, people have developed LLM agents that attempt to interact with repository code (e.g., compiling and evaluating its execution), prompting the need to evaluate their performance. These gaps have motivated our development of ML-Bench, a benchmark rooted in real-world programming applications that leverage existing code repositories to perform tasks. Addressing the need for LLMs to interpret long code contexts and translate instructions into precise, executable scripts, ML-Bench encompasses annotated 9,641 examples across 18 GitHub repositories, challenging LLMs to accommodate user-specified arguments and documentation intricacies effectively. To evaluate both LLMs and AI agents, two setups are employed: ML-LLM-Bench for assessing LLMs' text-to-code conversion within a predefined deployment environment, and ML-Agent-Bench for testing autonomous agents in an end-to-end task execution within a Linux sandbox environment. Our findings indicate that while GPT-4o leads with a Pass@5 rate surpassing 50%, there remains significant scope for improvement, highlighted by issues such as hallucinated outputs and difficulties with bash script generation. Notably, in the more demanding ML-Agent-Bench, GPT-4o achieves a 76.47% success rate, reflecting the efficacy of iterative action and feedback in complex task resolution. Our code, dataset, and models are available at https://github.com/gersteinlab/ML-bench.
Read more8/22/2024