Skip to content
Research Insights Made Simple
Research reviewResearch Insights Made Simple

The right fit: model, harness and task

Benchmarks break, and model rankings depend on the harness: what it means for agent evaluation

/ Research Insights Made Simple · Agent harnesses 10/24 · Model–harness fit

Slide contents

  1. 1. The right fit: model, harness and task

    Benchmarks break, and model rankings depend on the harness: what it means for agent evaluation

  2. 2. Swap the harness, the models swap places

    Terminal‑Bench 4, 63 tasks: Claude Opus 5 and GPT‑6 Astra in OpenHands and in PI

  3. 3. #45 added effects; here they interact

    Harbor: score = model + harness; here every model meets every harness

  4. 4. SWE‑bench Verified stopped measuring the frontier

    138 hard tasks, at least 6 engineers each: 59.4% have a defect

  5. 5. The replacement lasted under five months

    SWE‑bench Pro: 23.3% → 80.3% in 8 months, about 30% of tasks broken

  6. 6. Without answer leaks, GLM‑5.2 lost 21 points

    SWE‑Bench Pro Verified v3: protection on all 731 tasks, 102 repaired

  7. 7. Nine lines of conftest.py score 100%

    BenchJack: 9 of 10 popular benchmarks are hacked almost to the ceiling

  8. 8. Fixing the benchmark reordered the harnesses

    TB 2.1 fixed 28 of 89 tasks: Opus 4.6 in Claude Code +12.1, in Terminus 2 +0.9

  9. 9. 66 configurations, one counted run per task

    4 harnesses × 5 models × 3 task sets plus Codex–GPT and Claude Code–Claude

  10. 10. One TB4 task is 1.6 points

    How to read the numbers: mean reward, fixed denominator, no overall score

  11. 11. Model order depends on the harness

    TB4: Claude − GPT = +7.94 / −17.46 / −30.16 / −12.70 points

  12. 12. The native harness is not always best

    Claude Code leads on two task sets of three, Codex on none

  13. 13. The best harness changes with the task

    4 of 5 models change their winner across TUA, ALE and TB4

  14. 14. Kimi wins in openJiuwen on every set

    +5.61 / +6.91 / +11.11 points, but −2.32 on ALE computing tasks

  15. 15. Pricier does not mean better

    GPT: 60.32% in PI at $4.66 per task, 52.38% in DeepSeek Harness at $19.94

  16. 16. Models repair; harnesses return the signal

    10 TB4 pairs, OpenHands vs PI: the model started 180 of 192 responses

  17. 17. A timeout turns hangs into hints

    One TUA task, one model, Kimi K3: openJiuwen scores 1 in 11 minutes, PI scores 0

  18. 18. The agent signs off its own work

    35 of 35 reports on failed tasks claim that everything was verified

  19. 19. Reward alone poorly filters training data

    CAPTCHA: the best reward goes to the trajectory that bypassed a bot check

  20. 20. One run cannot measure variance

    Variance unmeasured, settings unmatched; TB 4.1 then regraded the tasks

  21. 21. Neighbours measure the harness effect differently

    Two studies find no robust score gap; Harbor finds only a small one

  22. 22. Evaluate the triple, not the model

    Benchmark and harness versions, resources, runs and an explicit criterion