When Agents Slow Down: Understanding LLM Agents' Test-Time Strategies via Elo-per-token Analysis
Elo-per-token analysis shows LLM agents' marginal gains drop below independent sampling at scale; parallel sessions beat one long session.
The paper proposes Elo-per-token analysis, using a Bradley-Terry model to measure how agent performance scales with token budget on open-ended tasks with continuous scoring. Across four agents and four benchmarks with sessions up to 100M tokens, agents initially convert tokens to Elo faster than independent sampling but eventually slow below the linear-in-log-compute reference. The authors define a scaling inflection point and show that splitting 100M tokens across parallel sessions on FrontierCS Polyomino Packing gains +264 Elo over one long session and +355 over ten short sessions. Human contestants on shared AtCoder Heuristic Contest tasks improve superlinearly, indicating headroom over current agents.
- Agents' marginal Elo gains eventually fall below independent-sampling reference
- Scaling inflection point defined where marginal gains match independent sampling
- Splitting 100M tokens across sessions gains +264 Elo on Polyomino Packing
- Human contestants still improve superlinearly, showing agent headroom
Full article231 words · extracted from huggingface.co · click to collapse
Large language model (LLM) agents allocate test-time compute adaptively as they revise solutions, use tools, explore alternatives, and decide when to stop. This test-time strategy makes it difficult to measure how agent performance scales. We study open-ended tasks that provide continuous scores for intermediate submissions, making progress observable throughout long trajectories. We propose Elo-per-token analysis, which tracks the best solution found at each token budget and uses a Bradley-Terry model to aggregate within-task orderings into Elo ratings across tasks with different score scales. We apply it to four general-purpose agents on four open-ended benchmarks, with sessions of up to 100M tokens, and to three feedback-driven LLM optimization harnesses in controlled single-task interventions. Independent sampling provides a theoretically characterized reference, for which Elo grows linearly with log compute. Against this reference, agents can initially convert tokens into Elo faster than independent sampling, but their marginal gains diminish and eventually fall below the reference. In contrast, the strongest historical human contestants improve superlinearly over contest time on shared AtCoder Heuristic Contest tasks, providing evidence of continual learning and substantial headroom after agents slow down. We define the scaling inflection point as the per-session budget where marginal Elo gains match the independent-sampling reference. Using this point as the per-session budget, we split 100M tokens across parallel sessions on FrontierCS Polyomino Packing, gaining +264 Elo over one long session and +355 over ten short sessions.
Text extracted automatically; images, tables and formatting may be missing. Original: https://huggingface.co/papers/2609.15309