Search: “LLM CLI”

3 stories in the last 30d

Searchkeyword smart Sortlatest hot importance relevance

DomainAll Cyber AIWindow24h 3d 7d 30d AllIn the wild Important only Show duplicates

CategoryAll AI tools & infra 5 Model release 3 AI research 3 AI safety & security 2 AI industry 1 Threat actor 1

SeverityAll critical 0 high 0 medium 3 low 0 info 12

Can LLMs Engineer Their Own Agent Harness? ByteDance Seed’s HarnessDev Says Only 34 of 64 Changes Generalize

ByteDance Seed's HarnessDev benchmark finds LLM-built agent harnesses trail human engineering on code and search, with only 34 of 64 revisions generalizing.

Researchers from ByteDance Seed, SUTD, Georgia Tech, M-A-P, and TokenWave.AI introduce HarnessDev, a benchmark that evaluates the runnable agent harness an LLM writes rather than its answers, using Creation and Evolution stages across SWE-bench Pro, Terminal-Bench 2.1, MLE-bench, EQ-Bench3, and BrowseComp (2,207 instances). Six creator models including Opus 4.8, GPT-5.5, Gemini 3.1 Pro, DeepSeek V4 Pro, Qwen 3.7 Max, and Seed 2.0 Pro were tested; Opus 4.8 posted the best average of 67.8 versus an 86.2 human-engineered reference. Self-built harnesses beat references on writing and ML experimentation but lag badly on code and search, and quality proved executor-specific: Opus 4.8 fell from 69.3 to 33.0 on SWE-bench Pro when the executor was switched to Gemini. Evolution gains were small and noisy: of 64 adjacent changes, feedback and held-out scores agreed only 34 times (53.1%), and much generated state and memory code never executed.

MarkTechPostupdated Sep 16, 17:41 UTC · 19h agofirst Sep 11, 22:01 UTC · 5d agoAI research 20 sources

Benchmark Radar: A Living Database and Search Engine for AI Benchmarks and Evaluation

Benchmark Radar provides a living searchable database of 1,283 AI benchmark records and 12,916 score observations drawn from 37 daily discovery sources.

Benchmark Radar combines daily discovery of benchmark papers, repositories, datasets, and releases from 13 direct connectors and 24 first-party feeds into a searchable catalog with model card mentions and score histories. The catalog contains 1,283 source records drawn from 4 benchmark catalogs plus 12,916 numeric observations on 790 records. The release includes a web dashboard with leaderboard, Pareto frontier of score versus usage, saturation and trend views, daily feeds, a CLI, and reproducible analysis. The paper audits the full catalog and examines benchmark saturation and limits of score comparisons.

Hugging Face daily papersSep 9, 20:00 UTC · 7d agoAI research

Benchmarking Qwen3.8 27B quantizations: 4-bit holds up, 1-bit collapses

Quesma benchmarks Qwen3.8 27B quantizations: 4-bit Q4_K_M matches BF16 on key benchmarks while 1-bit collapses to random chance.

Quesma spent roughly $3,000 on Modal GPUs testing Unsloth GGUF quantizations of Qwen3.8 27B across GPQA Diamond, IFBench, and Terminal-Bench 2.1. The 17 GB Q4_K_M quantization matched the 55 GB BF16 model on Terminal-Bench 2.1 and showed little degradation down to 4-bit, while the 2-bit UD-Q2_K_XL dropped noticeably. At 1-bit, scores on GPQA Diamond fell to random-guess levels, with longer reasoning making results worse, and reasoning effort settings significantly affected outcomes.

Hacker News · AISep 8, 14:49 UTC · 8d agoAI research HN 56↑ · 30 comments1