Skip to content
OpenTrain AIFor AI Companies

HFEPX · Eval paper review

Effective Strategies for Asynchronous Software Engineering Agents

Jiayi Geng, Graham Neubig

Published

Mar 23, 2026

Citations

0

Trust level

Moderate

Usefulness score

25/100 (Low)

Extraction confidence

55% (Moderate)

Derived from extracted protocol signals and abstract evidence.

Rater population

Not reported

Signals refreshed

Mar 23, 2026

Open arXiv Find implementation Shortlist (0) RSS feed

Tags

Automatic Metrics Coding Long Horizon Multi Agent

Should you rely on this paper?

This paper is adjacent to HFEPX scope and is best used for background context, not as a primary protocol reference.

Use this for comparison and orientation, not as your only source.

Best use

Background context only

Use if you need

A benchmark-and-metrics comparison anchor.

What to verify

Validate the evaluation procedure and quality controls in the full paper before operational use.

Main weakness

No major weakness surfaced.

Human feedback signal
Not explicit
Not explicit in abstract metadata
Evaluation signal
Detected
Eval setup described
Usefulness for eval research
25/100
Adjacent candidate

Treat as adjacent context, not a core eval-method reference.

If you are doing eval pipeline work, start here

Human Eval Papers LLM-as-Judge Papers Pairwise Preference Papers Tool-Use Evaluation Search

Abstract

AI agents have become increasingly capable at isolated software engineering (SWE) tasks such as resolving issues on Github. Yet long-horizon tasks involving multiple interdependent subtasks still pose challenges both with respect to accuracy, and with respect to timely completion. A natural approach to solving these long-horizon tasks in a timely manner is asynchronous multi-agent collaboration, where multiple agents work on different parts of the task at the same time. But effective application of multi-agent systems has proven surprisingly difficult: concurrent edits by multiple agents interfere with each other, dependencies are difficult to synchronize, and combining partial progress into a coherent whole is challenging. On the other hand, human developers have long relied on mature collaboration infrastructure to manage these challenges in large software projects. Inspired by these collaboration primitives, we introduce Centralized Asynchronous Isolated Delegation (CAID), a structured multi-agent coordination paradigm grounded in three core SWE primitives: centralized task delegation, asynchronous execution, and isolated workspaces. CAID constructs dependency-aware task plans through a central manager, executes subtasks concurrently in isolated workspaces, and consolidates progress via structured integration with executable test-based verification. In empirical evaluation, we find that CAID improves accuracy over single-agent baselines by 26.7% absolute on paper reproduction tasks (PaperBench) and 14.3% on Python library development tasks (Commit0). Through systematic analysis, we find that branch-and-merge is a central coordination mechanism for multi-agent collaboration, and that SWE primitives such as git worktree, git commit, and git merge enable it to be realized in a reliable and executable manner.

What we could verify

These are the protocol signals we could actually recover from the available paper metadata. Use them to decide whether this paper is worth deeper reading.

Human Feedback Types

missing

None explicit

No explicit feedback protocol extracted.

"AI agents have become increasingly capable at isolated software engineering (SWE) tasks such as resolving issues on Github."

Evaluation Modes

strong

Automatic Metrics

Includes extracted eval setup.

"AI agents have become increasingly capable at isolated software engineering (SWE) tasks such as resolving issues on Github."

Quality Controls

missing

Not reported

No explicit QC controls found.

"AI agents have become increasingly capable at isolated software engineering (SWE) tasks such as resolving issues on Github."

Benchmarks / Datasets

strong

Paperbench

Useful for quick benchmark comparison.

"In empirical evaluation, we find that CAID improves accuracy over single-agent baselines by 26.7% absolute on paper reproduction tasks (PaperBench) and 14.3% on Python library development tasks (Commit0)."

Reported Metrics

strong

Accuracy

Useful for evaluation criteria comparison.

"Yet long-horizon tasks involving multiple interdependent subtasks still pose challenges both with respect to accuracy, and with respect to timely completion."

Benchmarks and datasets

Paperbench

Reported metrics

accuracy
Human feedback details
Uses human feedback
No
Feedback types
None
Rater population
Not reported
Expertise required
Coding
Evaluation details
Evaluation modes
Automatic Metrics
Agentic eval
Long Horizon, Multi Agent
Quality controls
Not reported
Evidence quality
Moderate
Use this page as
Background context only

Research brief

Metadata summary

AI agents have become increasingly capable at isolated software engineering (SWE) tasks such as resolving issues on Github.

Based on abstract + metadata only. Check the source paper before making high-confidence protocol decisions.

Key takeaways

  • AI agents have become increasingly capable at isolated software engineering (SWE) tasks such as resolving issues on Github.
  • Yet long-horizon tasks involving multiple interdependent subtasks still pose challenges both with respect to accuracy, and with respect to timely completion.
  • A natural approach to solving these long-horizon tasks in a timely manner is asynchronous multi-agent collaboration, where multiple agents work on different parts of the task at the same time.

Researcher actions

  • Compare this paper against nearby papers in the same arXiv category before using it for protocol decisions.
  • Validate inferred eval signals (Automatic metrics, Long-horizon tasks) against the full paper.
  • Use related-paper links to find stronger protocol-specific references.

Caveats

  • Generated from abstract + metadata only; no PDF parsing.
  • Signals below are heuristic and may miss details reported outside the abstract.

Recommended queries

Accuracy

Contribution summary

  • AI agents have become increasingly capable at isolated software engineering (SWE) tasks such as resolving issues on Github.
  • Inspired by these collaboration primitives, we introduce Centralized Asynchronous Isolated Delegation (CAID), a structured multi-agent coordination paradigm grounded in three core SWE primitives: centralized task delegation, asynchronous…
  • In empirical evaluation, we find that CAID improves accuracy over single-agent baselines by 26.7% absolute on paper reproduction tasks (PaperBench) and 14.3% on Python library development tasks (Commit0).

Why it matters for eval

  • Inspired by these collaboration primitives, we introduce Centralized Asynchronous Isolated Delegation (CAID), a structured multi-agent coordination paradigm grounded in three core SWE primitives: centralized task delegation, asynchronous…
  • In empirical evaluation, we find that CAID improves accuracy over single-agent baselines by 26.7% absolute on paper reproduction tasks (PaperBench) and 14.3% on Python library development tasks (Commit0).

Researcher checklist

  • Human feedback protocol is explicit

    No explicit human feedback protocol detected.

  • Evaluation mode is explicit

    Detected: Automatic Metrics

  • Quality control reporting appears

    No calibration/adjudication/IAA control explicitly detected.

  • Benchmark or dataset anchors are present

    Detected: Paperbench

  • Metric reporting is present

    Detected: accuracy