Workspace-Bench 1.0:基于大规模文件依赖工作空间任务的AI智能体基准测试框架
Workspace-Bench 1.0: Benchmarking AI Agents on Workspace Tasks with Large-Scale File Dependencies
May 5, 2026
作者: Zirui Tang, Xuanhe Zhou, Yumou Liu, Linchun Li, Weizheng Wang, Hongzhang Huang, Jun Zhou, Jiachen Song, Shaoli Yu, Jinqi Wang, Zihang Zhou, Hongyi Zhou, Yuting Lv, Jinyang Li, Jiashuo Liu, Ruoyu Chen, Chunwei Liu, GuoLiang Li, Jihua Kang, Fan Wu
cs.AI
摘要
工作空间学习要求AI智能体能够识别、推理、利用并更新工作者工作空间中异构文件间的显性与隐性依赖关系,从而有效完成常规及高阶任务。尽管该能力至关重要,现有相关基准大多基于预设或合成文件对智能体进行评估,其现实依赖关系有限,导致工作空间层面的评估研究尚不充分。为此,我们推出Workspace-Bench基准测试框架,旨在评估AI智能体在涉及大规模文件依赖的工作空间学习中的表现。我们构建了包含5类工作者画像、74种文件类型、20,476个文件(最大达20GB)的拟真工作空间,精心设计了388项任务(每项任务均配有专属文件依赖关系图),并通过7,399条评估细则对智能体的跨文件检索、上下文推理及自适应决策能力进行综合测评。我们还提供包含100项任务的轻量版Workspace-Bench-Lite,在保持基准分布特征的同时将评估成本降低约70%。通过对4种主流智能体框架和7种基础模型的测试,实验结果表明当前智能体尚无法实现可靠的工作空间学习——最佳模型仅达到68.7%的准确率,显著低于人类80.7%的表现,且所有智能体的平均准确率仅为47.4%。
English
Workspace learning requires AI agents to identify, reason over, exploit, and update explicit and implicit dependencies among heterogeneous files in a worker's workspace, enabling them to complete both routine and advanced tasks effectively. Despite its importance, existing relevant benchmarks largely evaluate agents on pre-specified or synthesized files with limited real-world dependencies, leaving workspace-level evaluation underexplored. To this end, we introduce Workspace-Bench, a benchmark for evaluating AI agents on Workspace Learning invOlving Large-Scale File Dependencies. We construct realistic workspaces with 5 worker profiles, 74 file types, 20,476 files (up to 20GB) and curate 388 tasks, each with its own file dependency graph, evaluated across 7,399 total rubrics that require cross-file retrieval, contextual reasoning, and adaptive decision-making. We further provide Workspace-Bench-Lite, a 100-task subset that preserves the benchmark distribution while reducing evaluation costs by about 70%. We evaluate 4 popular agent harnesses and 7 foundation models. Experimental results show that current agents remain far from reliable workspace learning, where the best reaches only 68.7%, substantially below the human result of 80.7%, and the average performance across agents is only 47.4%.