Skip to content
AI News HubLIVE
Source content · Analysis pending2 min read

Choosing Before Acting: Comparative Value Estimation for Long-Horizon Tool-Use Agents

Summary

arXiv:2610.02330v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) rely on long-horizon tool invocation sequences for complex tasks, where each invocation can alter the task state and condition subsequent decisions. In long-horizon tool use, final-outcome rewards provide weak credit assignment over long interaction traces. Step-level rewards can offer more targeted feedback, but obtaining reliable step supervision often requires human or LLM judgment, or additional rollouts to estimate the downstream effect of an intermediate decision. In this paper, we argue that effective tool-use agents should estimate the long-horizon value of a possible next tool invocation before executing it. This objective requires comparative supervision over alternative invocations under the same conte…

SourcearXiv AIAuthor: Yu Li, Zheng Zhang, Xin Liu, Shengtian Yang, Guangfeng Cai, Lei Feng
Choosing Before Acting: Comparative Value Estimation for Long-Horizon Tool-Use Agents
Report an error

The correction channel is not available yet. You can copy the article reference below for later.

Correction instructions
Read article

[Submitted on 1 Oct 2026]

Title:Choosing Before Acting: Comparative Value Estimation for Long-Horizon Tool-Use Agents

View a PDF of the paper titled Choosing Before Acting: Comparative Value Estimation for Long-Horizon Tool-Use Agents, by Yu Li and 5 other authors

View PDF HTML (experimental)

Abstract:Large language models (LLMs) rely on long-horizon tool invocation sequences for complex tasks, where each invocation can alter the task state and condition subsequent decisions. In long-horizon tool use, final-outcome rewards provide weak credit assignment over long interaction traces. Step-level rewards can offer more targeted feedback, but obtaining reliable step supervision often requires human or LLM judgment, or additional rollouts to estimate the downstream effect of an intermediate decision. In this paper, we argue that effective tool-use agents should estimate the long-horizon value of a possible next tool invocation before executing it. This objective requires comparative supervision over alternative invocations under the same context, while logged trajectories only contain the invocation that was actually taken. Therefore, we propose Comparative Inference for Tool-use Agents (CITA). CITA trains a Comparative Inference Model (CIM) from paired signals that combine observed tool behavior, scalable supervision from a Bayesian tool-graph simulator, and semantic judgments from LLM-based comparison. The resulting CIM learns to estimate how likely a possible next tool invocation is to support final task success under the current context. Across three tool-use benchmarks and multiple backbone LLMs, CITA consistently improves Tool F1 and task success. Additional analysis shows that CIM learns accurate step-level value estimates for comparative tool choices.

Comments: NeurIPS 2026 Poster

Subjects:

Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)

Cite as: arXiv:2610.02330 [cs.AI]

(or arXiv:2610.02330v1 [cs.AI] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.02330

arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

Submission history

From: Yu Li [view email] [v1] Thu, 1 Oct 2026 18:04:04 UTC (982 KB)

Full-text links:

Access Paper:

View a PDF of the paper titled Choosing Before Acting: Comparative Value Estimation for Long-Horizon Tool-Use Agents, by Yu Li and 5 other authors

View PDF

HTML (experimental)

TeX Source

view license

Current browse context:

cs.AI

new | recent | 2026-10

Change to browse by:

cs

References & Citations

NASA ADS

Google Scholar

Semantic Scholar

Loading...

Data provided by:

Bibliographic Tools

Bibliographic and Citation Tools

Bibliographic Explorer Toggle

Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?)

Connected Papers Toggle

Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?)

Litmaps Toggle

Litmaps (What is Litmaps?)

scite.ai Toggle

scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?)

Code, Data, Media

Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article

alphaXiv Toggle

alphaXiv (What is alphaXiv?)

Links to Code Toggle

CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers (What is CatalyzeX?)

DagsHub Toggle

DagsHub (What is DagsHub?)

GotitPub Toggle

Gotit.pub (What is GotitPub?)

Huggingface Toggle

Hugging Face (What is Huggingface?)

ScienceCast Toggle

ScienceCast (What is ScienceCast?)

Demos

Demos

Replicate Toggle

Replicate (What is Replicate?)

Spaces Toggle

Hugging Face Spaces (What is Spaces?)

Spaces Toggle

TXYZ.AI (What is TXYZ.AI?)

Related Papers

Recommenders and Search Tools

Link to Influence Flower

Influence Flower (What are Influence Flowers?)

Core recommender toggle

CORE Recommender (What is CORE?)

Author

Venue

Institution

Topic

About arXivLabs

arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Which authors of this paper are endorsers? | Disable MathJax (What is MathJax?)

Key points and analysis

Article intelligence

EngineersAdvanced

Key points

  • AI generation is temporarily unavailable; this entry was preserved with deterministic fallback metadata.
  • arXiv:2610.02330v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) rely on long-horizon tool invocation sequences for complex tasks, where each invocation can alter the…

Highlights and analysis are generated automatically and may contain errors. Check the original source.