Papers › LoopArena: Benchmarking Models as Runtime Controllers for Loop Engineering
LoopArena: Benchmarking Models as Runtime Controllers for Loop Engineering
Yi Wang, Haopeng Zhang, Chengxiang Huang, Rui Dai, Kaikui Liu, Piotr Koniusz, Xiangxiang Chu
Title, abstract, authors and date from arXiv's metadata (CC0); this paper is not in the Papers with Code archive (frozen 2025-07-28).
Loop Engineering is emerging as a practice for organizing development work around coding agents. Instead of writing each prompt by hand, practitioners design loops that monitor progress, assign work, run checks, and decide what the agent should do next. Even with a capable coding agent, a loop may trust a stale progress note, skip needed verification, spend its budget in the wrong direction, or stop before the task is safe to submit. Yet the final outcome of one end-to-end run cannot tell whether success or failure reflects the loop's guidance or the coding agent's ability to carry out the task. We introduce LoopArena, a benchmark for evaluating how well one model can guide a separate coding agent through a long-running task. The model under evaluation is the \textbf{Controller}: after each coding round, it receives a structured summary of the run and instructs a separate, fixed coding agent, the \textbf{Worker}, on what to do or verify next, or decides whether to stop. LoopArena evaluates this ability in three complementary settings that differ in execution scope and cost. Type I scores next-step Loop Contract selection through execution-validated questions without running the Worker at evaluation time. Type II executes repeated control over a selected slice of a full task, while Type III evaluates the paired full task from its original state. On full tasks, the best observed Strict Success Rate is \textbf{24.69\%}, leaving substantial room for improvement in long-horizon loop control. Across Controllers, the paired reduction in estimated inference cost averages \textbf{64.4\%}, and Type II produces a similar ordering under the main Core criterion (Spearman's ρ=0.9747). We release the benchmark data and evaluation code at https://github.com/AMAP-ML/LoopArena .
In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.
For agents, Syntology's MCP tool lists every function and class Syntology harvested from this paper and whether it ran (how to connect): get_harvested_code_for_paper(arxiv_id="2608.28281")
Code
Syntology Ran 8 of 12 code samples harvested from 1 repository linked to this paper; 4 have no recorded run. Of those that ran: 8 ran with no contract checked.
By repository: found in paper text by Syntology: 12 samples from 1 repository, 8 ran. The run record, sample by sample. “Ran” means executed on a synthesized input, not that the code is correct or reproduces the paper.
Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
12 samples harvested; 8 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 4 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-24; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.
Licence: 0 of the 12 samples are pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.
Harvested from AMAP-ML/LoopArena. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.
Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.
Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.
2d2e8d3b531bf5da · report
a931e05553505f6b · report
94737b3d35ed3146 · report
3f78f7bcd3deb220 · report
a46c7e977f48c70c · report
68131a46264551ab · report
2cc7ab3ef7219f62 · report
cb6bfce53ed0b6d6 · report
63d8975575b4f621 · report
a8c21f6c4ada713e · report
63a309bcd57f8929 · report
b316e927dce3ae6a · report
Results from the paper
The Papers with Code archive ends with its 2025-07-28 snapshot. This paper's arXiv identifier, 2608.28281, was issued in August 2026, after that date, so the archive has no leaderboard rows for it.
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections