{ "schema_version": 1, "builder_plan": { "scenario": "An agent looks good in demos, but you cannot tell which product tasks it fails.", "change": "Use the study's evaluation idea to inspect a small set of tasks with human-checked answers.", "baseline": "Your current evaluator and a manually reviewed reference set.", "steps": [ "Locate the paper's implementation and check its license, model support, data needs, and hardware requirements. Stop here if you cannot obtain the required artifacts.", "Save a small set of representative product tasks and expected outcomes. Keep evaluation tasks out of any training or tuning, and choose quality and cost limits before running.", "Run the baseline and the proposed change on identical inputs. Keep other settings fixed and repeat paired runs to expose variation.", "Save per-task outputs, failures, timings, and all usage costs. Review regressions before expanding the test." ], "measure": "Agreement with human review, missed failures, false alarms, and evaluation cost per task.", "decision": "Keep the change only if it meets your preselected quality and latency limits and improves the metric you care about after setup and operating costs. Otherwise retain the baseline. This is an exploration plan, not a validated recommendation." }, "builder_review": null, "arxiv_id": "2609.17394", "title": "Coding Agents Have Converged: Why the SWE-bench Leaderboard Can No Longer Order Its Top Entries, and What to Measure Instead", "summary": "Replaces rank-based interpretation of small SWE-bench score gaps with a five-step audit: shared-outcome profiling, paired McNemar tests, tier grouping with multiple-comparison correction, and instance-budget estimation for resolving differences. Costs only analysis effort on existing published submissions, requiring no model runs, GPU time, or new infrastructure, though applying it to private systems requires access to per-instance outputs. Can mislead if non-rejection is read as equivalence, if the observational scaffold comparisons are treated as causal, or if the comparison set is unrepresentative of the reader's actual workload.", "rationale": "The reader selecting coding-agent model-scaffold pairs for production should stop trusting small leaderboard gaps and instead apply this zero-cost statistical audit plus model-scaffold provenance reporting to make defensible adoption decisions.", "technique": "Statistical audit protocol for agent leaderboards", "family": "avaliacao_de_agente", "recommendation": "adotar", "published": "2026-09-15", "as_of": "2026-10-18", "editorial_status": "indexed", "source_url": "https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.17394", "independent_implementations": 0, "total_implementations": 0, "stars": 0, "citations": 0, "claims": [ { "claim_id": "claim-01", "statement": "Replaces rank-based interpretation of small SWE-bench score gaps with a five-step audit: shared-outcome profiling, paired McNemar tests, tier grouping with multiple-comparison correction, and instance-budget estimation for resolving differences. Costs only analysis effort on existing published submissions, requiring no model runs, GPU time, or new infrastructure, though applying it to private systems requires access to per-instance outputs. Can mislead if non-rejection is read as equivalence, if the observational scaffold comparisons are treated as causal, or if the comparison set is unrepresentative of the reader's actual workload.", "basis": "inferred", "result": "", "baseline": "", "conditions": "", "source_url": "https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.17394", "source_page": null, "source_excerpt": "" }, { "claim_id": "claim-02", "statement": "No adjacent pair among the Verified top thirty is separable by exact paired McNemar tests at alpha=0.05; within-model scaffold variation reaches 29.8 percentage points, exceeding the 8.8-point spread of the top thirty.", "basis": "inferred", "result": "", "baseline": "", "conditions": "", "source_url": "https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.17394", "source_page": null, "source_excerpt": "" } ], "exposure_map": [ { "dimension": "quality", "basis": "not_evaluated", "finding": "", "interpretation": "", "limitation": "", "next_check": "", "source_url": "", "source_page": null, "source_excerpt": "" }, { "dimension": "compute", "basis": "not_evaluated", "finding": "", "interpretation": "", "limitation": "", "next_check": "", "source_url": "", "source_page": null, "source_excerpt": "" }, { "dimension": "latency", "basis": "not_evaluated", "finding": "", "interpretation": "", "limitation": "", "next_check": "", "source_url": "", "source_page": null, "source_excerpt": "" }, { "dimension": "operations", "basis": "not_evaluated", "finding": "", "interpretation": "", "limitation": "", "next_check": "", "source_url": "", "source_page": null, "source_excerpt": "" }, { "dimension": "compatibility", "basis": "not_evaluated", "finding": "", "interpretation": "", "limitation": "", "next_check": "", "source_url": "", "source_page": null, "source_excerpt": "" }, { "dimension": "security", "basis": "not_evaluated", "finding": "", "interpretation": "", "limitation": "", "next_check": "", "source_url": "", "source_page": null, "source_excerpt": "" }, { "dimension": "data_and_training", "basis": "not_evaluated", "finding": "", "interpretation": "", "limitation": "", "next_check": "", "source_url": "", "source_page": null, "source_excerpt": "" }, { "dimension": "reproducibility", "basis": "not_evaluated", "finding": "", "interpretation": "", "limitation": "", "next_check": "", "source_url": "", "source_page": null, "source_excerpt": "" } ], "risks": [], "minimum_test": [], "open_questions": [], "independent_tests": [], "lab_reproductions": [], "report_available": false, "validation_tier": "unknown", "evidence_tier": "unknown", "infrastructure_basis": "unknown", "equations": [], "equations_status": "not_fetched", "core_kind": "", "equations_fetched_at": "", "equations_source_url": "", "equations_source_sha256": "", "exposures_reviewed_at": "", "exposures_source_sha256": "" }