Skip to content
AI News HubLIVE
Source content · Analysis pending3 min read

Measuring the Microtask Eligibility Gap: When Is an Off-the-Shelf SLM Enough for an Agent Harness?

Summary

arXiv:2610.00025v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Agent harnesses increasingly want to run small language models (SLMs) on the microtasks around a frontier large language model (LLM) planner: auto-approving shell commands, writing memory, selecting tools, ranking past turns. We ask whether off-the-shelf SLMs meet practitioner-defined thresholds and, when they fail, why, and whether quantization changes the answer. We build a benchmark of 4 such microtasks with fixed prompts and automatic metrics, each with a pre-specified threshold $\tau$ anchored to a cheap non-LLM baseline and a CI-aware eligibility rule (a configuration passes only if its confidence bound clears $\tau$). Sweeping Qwen3 0.6/1.7/4/8B at their best (FP16, greedy, one frozen prompt, no tuning), we find an eligibility gap: 0…

SourcearXiv AIAuthor: Jundong Hu, Shekar Ramachandran
Measuring the Microtask Eligibility Gap: When Is an Off-the-Shelf SLM Enough for an Agent Harness?
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 Sep 2026]

Title:Measuring the Microtask Eligibility Gap: When Is an Off-the-Shelf SLM Enough for an Agent Harness?

View a PDF of the paper titled Measuring the Microtask Eligibility Gap: When Is an Off-the-Shelf SLM Enough for an Agent Harness?, by Jundong Hu and 1 other authors

View PDF HTML (experimental)

Abstract:Agent harnesses increasingly want to run small language models (SLMs) on the microtasks around a frontier large language model (LLM) planner: auto-approving shell commands, writing memory, selecting tools, ranking past turns. We ask whether off-the-shelf SLMs meet practitioner-defined thresholds and, when they fail, why, and whether quantization changes the answer. We build a benchmark of 4 such microtasks with fixed prompts and automatic metrics, each with a pre-specified threshold $\tau$ anchored to a cheap non-LLM baseline and a CI-aware eligibility rule (a configuration passes only if its confidence bound clears $\tau$). Sweeping Qwen3 0.6/1.7/4/8B at their best (FP16, greedy, one frozen prompt, no tuning), we find an eligibility gap: 0 of 16 (4 tasks $\times$ 4 models) configurations pass (verified by checking the raw outputs and parser behavior). A logprob decision-threshold diagnostic (T1/T3/T4; T2 via a context-length/cascade probe) separates the failures into capability deficits and failures that can be addressed by changing the decoding threshold (4 regimes). Quantization to 4-bit (RTN/GPTQ/AWQ) does damage that depends on model size and moves no configuration into eligibility (certified on the reconstructable hard-label tasks T1/T3, diagnostic/windowed robustness on T2/T4), so the gap tracks model size more than precision; it replicates on Llama-3.x (12/12 ineligible) and is robust to the anchor choice (a $\tau$-sweep) and to prompt wording (0/112 eligible across the original plus 3 neutral paraphrases per cell). The practical implication: place SLMs behind a baseline that meets the CI-backed threshold, and use the SLM only where the baseline fails to meet the threshold; e.g. a 4B re-ranker over a BM25 shortlist beats BM25 ($+0.047$ [0.020, 0.073], without itself certifying eligibility).

Comments: Preprint. under review at a NeurIPS 2026 workshop. 15 pages, 8 figures, 14 tables

Subjects:

Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Machine Learning (cs.LG)

Cite as: arXiv:2610.00025 [cs.AI]

(or arXiv:2610.00025v1 [cs.AI] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.00025

arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite

Submission history

From: Jundong Hu [view email] [v1] Tue, 1 Sep 2026 21:07:51 UTC (171 KB)

Full-text links:

Access Paper:

View a PDF of the paper titled Measuring the Microtask Eligibility Gap: When Is an Off-the-Shelf SLM Enough for an Agent Harness?, by Jundong Hu and 1 other authors

View PDF

HTML (experimental)

TeX Source

view license

Current browse context:

cs.AI

new | recent | 2026-10

Change to browse by:

cs cs.LG

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:2610.00025v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Agent harnesses increasingly want to run small language models (SLMs) on the microtasks around a frontier large language model (LLM…

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