RExBench: Can coding agents autonomously implement AI research extensions?
Nicholas Edwards, Yukyung Lee, Yujun Audrey Mao, Yulu Qin, Sebastian Schuster, Najoung Kim
Abstract
Agents based on Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown promise for performing sophisticated software engineering tasks autonomously. In addition, there has been progress towards developing agents that can perform parts of the research pipeline in machine learning and the natural sciences. We argue that research extension and its implementation is a critical capability for such systems, and introduce REXBENCH to support the evaluation of this capability. REXBENCH is a benchmark consisting of realistic extensions of 12 research papers that aim to investigate novel research hypotheses. Each task is set up as an extension to an existing research paper and codebase, accompanied by domain expert-written instructions. REXBENCH is robust to data contamination, and supports an automatic evaluation infrastructure that executes agent outputs to determine whether the success criteria are met. We use this benchmark to evaluate 12 LLM agents implemented using two different frameworks: aider and OpenHands. We find that all agents fail to autonomously implement the majority of the extensions, with the best agent at around 33% success rate. Although the success rate improves with additional humanwritten hints, the best performance under this setting remains below 44%. This indicates that current agents are still short of being able to handle realistic research extension tasks without substantial human guidance. huggingface.co/datasets/tin-lab/RExBench https://rexbench.com
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext 7b2c2857-fb47-48b2-8f1c-b10e7f8c6de1Builds on24
- Tree of Thoughts: Deliberate Problem Solving with Large Language ModelsShunyu Yao, Dian Yu, Jeffrey Zhao, Izhak Shafran et al.NeurIPS 2023 · 5,068 citations
- SWE-bench: Can Language Models Resolve Real-world Github Issues?Carlos E. Jimenez, John Yang, Alexander Wettig, Shunyu Yao et al.ICLR 2024 · 2,082 citations
- Terminal-Bench: Benchmarking Agents on Hard, Realistic Tasks in Command Line InterfacesMike A. Merrill, Alexander Glenn Shaw, Nicholas Carlini, Boxuan Li et al.ICLR 2026 · 520 citations
- MLAgentBench: Evaluating Language Agents on Machine Learning ExperimentationQian Huang, Jian Vora, Percy Liang, Jure LeskovecICML 2024 · 209 citations
- COGS: A Compositional Generalization Challenge Based on Semantic InterpretationNajoung Kim, Tal LinzenEMNLP 2020 · 149 citations
Related papers
- LMR-BENCH: Evaluating LLM Agent's Ability on Reproducing Language Modeling ResearchShuo Yan, Ruochen Li, Ziming Luo, Zimu Wang et al.EMNLP 2025
- EXP-Bench: Can AI Conduct AI Research Experiments?Patrick Tser Jern Kon, Qiuyi Ding, Jiachen Liu, Xinyi Zhu et al.ICLR 2026 · 35 citations
- AI-Researcher: Autonomous Scientific InnovationJiabin Tang, Lianghao Xia, Zhonghang Li, Chao HuangNeurIPS 2025 · 101 citations
- From Reproduction to Replication: Evaluating Research Agents with Progressive Code MaskingGyeongwon James Kim, Alex Wilf, Louis-Philippe Morency, Daniel FriedICLR 2026 · 12 citations
- SEC-bench: Automated Benchmarking of LLM Agents on Real-World Software Security TasksHwiwon Lee, Ziqi Zhang, Hanxiao Lu, Lingming ZhangNeurIPS 2025 · 86 citations
