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

SpireBench: Evaluating Long-Horizon Strategic Play of Agentic Models with Slay the Spire

Summary

arXiv:2610.12596v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Agentic large language models now tackle complex tasks, yet strategic reasoning over long horizons is under-studied: most agentic benchmarks are short and episodic, and performance on long tasks is hard to dissect into stored knowledge, reasoning and luck. We introduce SpireBench, in which models play the complete commercial deck-builder Slay the Spire (StS), where early decisions decide long-term success. Across 20 large language models (LLMs) at the game's highest difficulty, frontier models beat heuristic baselines and match the average human player but remain far behind experts. This gap widens as the run lengthens: the strongest models win the first act as often as experts, then fall behind. What separates strong models from weak is how…

SourcearXiv AIAuthor: Scott C. Lowe, Sander W. Keemink
SpireBench: Evaluating Long-Horizon Strategic Play of Agentic Models with Slay the Spire
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 8 Oct 2026]

Title:SpireBench: Evaluating Long-Horizon Strategic Play of Agentic Models with Slay the Spire

View a PDF of the paper titled SpireBench: Evaluating Long-Horizon Strategic Play of Agentic Models with Slay the Spire, by Scott C. Lowe and 1 other authors

View PDF HTML (experimental)

Abstract:Agentic large language models now tackle complex tasks, yet strategic reasoning over long horizons is under-studied: most agentic benchmarks are short and episodic, and performance on long tasks is hard to dissect into stored knowledge, reasoning and luck. We introduce SpireBench, in which models play the complete commercial deck-builder Slay the Spire (StS), where early decisions decide long-term success. Across 20 large language models (LLMs) at the game's highest difficulty, frontier models beat heuristic baselines and match the average human player but remain far behind experts. This gap widens as the run lengthens: the strongest models win the first act as often as experts, then fall behind. What separates strong models from weak is how well they play each fight; all of them misjudge risk over a run, preserving health rather than spending it to grow stronger. A comprehensive, self-consistent renaming of every game term shows that part of their performance rests on prior knowledge of the game, and models do not improve from the memories they write across runs, which are often wrong and overly cautious. Our harness is the first to give a model the complete original game, and we compare it with existing harnesses. Overall, SpireBench offers an unsaturated long-horizon benchmark with tools to locate where and why agents fail.

Subjects:

Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Computation and Language (cs.CL); Machine Learning (cs.LG)

Cite as: arXiv:2610.12596 [cs.AI]

(or arXiv:2610.12596v1 [cs.AI] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.12596

arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

Submission history

From: Scott Lowe [view email] [v1] Thu, 8 Oct 2026 18:18:19 UTC (2,011 KB)

Full-text links:

Access Paper:

View a PDF of the paper titled SpireBench: Evaluating Long-Horizon Strategic Play of Agentic Models with Slay the Spire, by Scott C. Lowe and 1 other authors

View PDF

HTML (experimental)

TeX Source

view license

Additional Features

Audio Summary

Current browse context:

cs.AI

new | recent | 2026-10

Change to browse by:

cs cs.CL 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:2610.12596v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Agentic large language models now tackle complex tasks, yet strategic reasoning over long horizons is under-studied: most agentic b…

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