arXiv subjects

Zhejian Peng

Publications and source records attributed to Zhejian Peng.

6 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

PersonaCodeBench: Evaluating Coding Agents in Persona-driven Human-Interactive Sessions

Coding agents must deliver correct software while respecting users' expertise, preferences, and working conditions. Existing benchmarks increasingly incorporate interaction, yet personalized requirement fulfillment remains underexplored. We introduce PersonaCodeBench, which turns user characteristics into verifiable obligations in persona-driven multi-turn coding sessions. Our persona pool spans roles, technical abilities, interaction preferences, and practical constraints, yielding task-grounded evolved requirements for implementation, permissions, testing, explanation, and delivery. At runtime, a controller governs user simulator responses and requirement disclosure, using online requirement evaluation to provide feedback and advance the interaction. Requirements emerge progressively, with their content, disclosure conditions, and acceptance criteria fixed before evaluation. A completion verifier and a personalization verifier separately assess native correctness and persona fulfillment. Joint pass requires both adherence to the declared budget and compliance with validity conditions. We evaluate all major frontier agents, establish a comprehensive leaderboard, and conduct detailed experimental analyses to validate effectiveness. PersonaCodeBench supports reproducible evaluation of coding agents' ability to meet explicit, personalized user expectations alongside coding objectives.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2026

PersonaScienceBench: Evaluating Scientific Agents with Diverse Simulated Researchers

Scientific agents collaborate with researchers whose expertise and preferences differ, but benchmarks usually hold the collaborator fixed. We introduce PersonaScienceBench: 200 tasks from five benchmarks across four scientific domains. Simulated researchers provide context and feedback according to persona profiles, while task objectives and grading remain fixed. Agents encounter researcher preferences only through conversation. Across eighteen modelconfigurations, task performance, fact recovery, and self-repetition reveal different strengths. Detailed GPT 6 Astra analyses show distinct agent responses across researcher profiles; interaction traces illustrate targeted clar ification and workflow revision. These behaviors can differ even when final scores match. PersonaScienceBench therefore evaluates how agents collaborate with diverse researchers alongside whether they complete the task.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2026

PersonaChatBench: Evaluating Chat Assistants with Diverse Simulated Users

Conversational assistants are expected to help people with diverse backgrounds, preferences, and communication styles. Yet evaluations centered on a single cooperative user provide limited insight into how reliably an assistant serves users with different personas. We introduce PersonaChatBench, a framework for evaluating task competence and responsiveness to diverse user needs. PersonaChatBench pairs the same underlying task with multiple simulated users, each guided by a private persona card that specifies distinct needs, preferences, and interaction behaviors. By holding the task fixed while varying the user, the framework examines how assistant performance changes across user conditions. We evaluate 20 language models across six domains, separately assessing native task outcomes, fulfillment of expressed persona needs, and simulator fidelity. Our results show that task performance and need fulfillment vary across personas and domains. Strong task performance does not necessarily translate into satisfying individual needs, and models' relative strengths in meeting those needs are not consistent across domains. PersonaChatBench makes these differences measurable, revealing gaps obscured by aggregate scores and helping identify which users an assistant serves well and where adaptation is needed. It provides a basis for evaluating consistency across users and guiding the development of assistants that better accommodate diverse needs in everyday applications.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

PersonaCUABench: Benchmarking Computer-Use Agents Serving Diverse Personas

Computer-use agents (CUAs) are commonly evaluated against fixed task specifications, but users may omit requirements, add constraints, or require approval before consequential actions. Completing the benchmark instruction does not guarantee serving the person who asked. We introduce PersonaCUABench, which holds 74 tasks across 11 domains fixed and varies only who asks. A persona agent, playing one of 44 personas in four groups, rewrites each instruction in that user's own words and answers the CUA's questions, while the CUA sees only the dialogue, never the profile or the original instruction. Across nine backbones (3,330 runs), mean task completion falls by 36% relative to the original requests. The losses have two sources: in 59.9% of cells that lose points, the agent engages with what the user asked for and still gets it wrong, and 11.2% are stops the user requested that the checker scores as failures. Even when a persona request is fully completed, the user gives the top satisfaction rating in only 62.7% of cells, against 84.1% for the original requests. CUAs should therefore be evaluated not only on task completion but also on whether they meet the requirements and constraints users express. Code: https://github.com/MatrAIx-ai/PersonaCUABench. Project page: https://matraix.ai/research/persona-cua.html

cs.HC↗

arXiv2026

AgentPersonaBench: Benchmarking Persona-Driven User Simulation

We introduce AgentPersonaBench (APB), a benchmark evaluating whether persona conditioning faithfully steers downstream agent behavior. While language models are increasingly deployed for persona-driven user simulation, existing benchmarks primarily evaluate conversational styling or self-reports rather than authentic behavioral fidelity. APB evaluates latent persona adherence one trait at a time, embedding each target trait within a complete synthetic profile without explicitly naming the trait or disclosing the test. Ground-truth adherence is verified strictly from observable actions across four interaction surfaces of increasing realism: survey, chat, web (interactive web environments), and app (desktop software environments). APB comprises 2,460 tasks spanning 867 traits, verified through automated audits and expert review. Our evaluation of 20 frontier model arms demonstrates that high-fidelity user simulation is already attainable: leading models achieve up to 84.7% full-pass adherence under unprompted conditions. At the same time, APB identifies clear behavioral boundaries: adherence drops across interaction modalities (only 37.9-64.3% pass all four surfaces), multi-attribute demands degrade retention, and competing model families exhibit pronounced behavioral divergence.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2026

MatrAIx: Simulating the World with 8.3 Billion Persona Agents

Human evaluation of AI systems and digital products is costly, slow, and difficult to scale. Offline evaluations are more scalable but often abstract away human diversity and interactive behavior. We therefore introduce MatrAIx, a population-scale simulated-user evaluation infrastructure for testing AI systems and digital products with heterogeneous users. MatrAIx has three core components: First, Persona 8B contains 8.3 billion persona records represented by 1,290 categorical dimensions. Records are either sampled from a dependency graph that preserves correlated attributes or derived from human-authored profiles. We release a quality-filtered coreset of approximately 1 million personas, comprising 599,847 human-grounded and 400,000 synthetic records. Second, the MatrAIx Playground provides four environments in which diverse users evaluate and interact with digital products: Survey, AI Chatbot, Web, and App. Third, MatrAIx provides 1,010 application tasks spanning more than 25 domains, including Commerce, Software, Finance, and Healthcare. We conducted 18,189 evaluation trials across eight representative tasks. Persona agents were powered by three LLMs: Claude Opus 4.8, GPT 5.5, and Claude Haiku 4.5. The resulting feedback captures how decisions and preferences vary across persona backgrounds, including hesitation after a price increase, willingness to continue after an AI assistant fails, and latency tolerance. We conducted two main validation studies: First, a 400-trial controlled study evaluated persona adherence across ten behavioral attributes and all four environments. The declared behavior was expressed or correctly suppressed in 366 trials (91.5%). Second, human and LLM judges evaluated the extraction quality of human-grounded personas. Overall, MatrAIx provides an end-to-end infrastructure for evaluating AI systems and digital products with diverse simulated human users.

cs.AI↗