Skip to content
← Back to explorer

HFEPX Hub

Simulation Env + Multi Agent Papers

Updated from current HFEPX corpus (Feb 27, 2026). 12 papers are grouped in this hub page. Common evaluation modes: Simulation Env, Llm As Judge. Most common rater population: Domain Experts. Common annotation unit: Freeform. Frequently cited benchmark: Lawbench. Common metric signal: cost. Newest paper in this set is from Feb 24, 2026.

Papers: 12 Last published: Feb 24, 2026 Global RSS Tag RSS
Simulation EnvMulti Agent

Research Narrative

Grounded narrative Model: deterministic-grounded

Updated from current HFEPX corpus (Feb 27, 2026). This page covers 12 papers centered on Simulation Env + Multi Agent Papers. Common evaluation modes include Simulation Env, Llm As Judge, with benchmark emphasis on Lawbench, Visualwebarena. Use the anchored takeaways below to compare protocol choices and identify papers with stronger evidence depth.

Why This Matters For Eval Research

Protocol Takeaways

Benchmark Interpretation

  • Lawbench appears as a recurring benchmark anchor in this page.
  • 1 papers (8.3%) mention Lawbench.
  • Most common evaluation modes: Simulation Env.

Metric Interpretation

  • cost is a common reported metric and should be paired with protocol context before ranking methods.
  • 1 papers (8.3%) mention cost.
  • Most common evaluation modes: Llm As Judge, Simulation Env.

Researcher Checklist

  • Papers with explicit human feedback: Coverage is a replication risk (16.7% vs 45% target).
  • Papers reporting quality controls: Coverage is a replication risk (0% vs 30% target).
  • Papers naming benchmarks/datasets: Coverage is a replication risk (16.7% vs 35% target).
  • Papers naming evaluation metrics: Coverage is a replication risk (8.3% vs 35% target).
  • Papers with known rater population: Coverage is a replication risk (16.7% vs 35% target).
  • Papers with known annotation unit: Coverage is a replication risk (8.3% vs 35% target).

Papers with explicit human feedback

Coverage is a replication risk (16.7% vs 45% target).

Papers reporting quality controls

Coverage is a replication risk (0% vs 30% target).

Papers naming benchmarks/datasets

Coverage is a replication risk (16.7% vs 35% target).

Papers naming evaluation metrics

Coverage is a replication risk (8.3% vs 35% target).

Papers with known rater population

Coverage is a replication risk (16.7% vs 35% target).

Papers with known annotation unit

Coverage is a replication risk (8.3% vs 35% target).

Suggested Reading Order

  1. 1. Cooperative-Competitive Team Play of Real-World Craft Robots

    Start with this anchor paper for scope and protocol framing. Covers Simulation Env.

  2. 2. Architecting AgentOS: From Token-Level Context to Emergent System-Level Intelligence

    Covers Simulation Env.

  3. 3. MALLVI: A Multi-Agent Framework for Integrated Generalized Robotics Manipulation

    Covers Simulation Env.

  4. 4. World-Model-Augmented Web Agents with Action Correction

    Covers Llm As Judge, Simulation Env.

  5. 5. Colosseum: Auditing Collusion in Cooperative Multi-Agent Systems

    Covers Simulation Env.

  6. 6. Does Socialization Emerge in AI Agent Society? A Case Study of Moltbook

    Covers Simulation Env.

  7. 7. OR-Agent: Bridging Evolutionary Search and Structured Research for Automated Algorithm Discovery

    Covers Simulation Env.

  8. 8. Multimodal Multi-Agent Empowered Legal Judgment Prediction

    Covers Simulation Env.

Known Limitations

  • Narrative synthesis is grounded in metadata and abstracts only; full-paper method details may be missing.
  • Extraction fields are conservative and can under-report implicit protocol details.
  • Cross-page comparisons should control for benchmark and metric mismatch.

Research Utility Links

simulation_env vs llm_as_judge

both=2, left_only=10, right_only=0

2 papers use both Simulation Env and Llm As Judge.

Top Papers

Related Hubs