PersonaCUABench: Benchmarking Computer-Use Agents Serving Diverse Personas

Hugging Face Daily Papers Papers

Summary

论文提出 PersonaCUABench,通过 74 个任务和 44 个不同用户画像来评估计算机使用代理(CUA),发现相比原始指令,任务完成率平均下降 36%,表明 CUA 在满足真实用户的个性化需求和约束方面仍存在显著不足。

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
Original Article
View Cached Full Text

Cached at: 10/30/26, 03:16 AM

Paper page - PersonaCUABench: Benchmarking Computer-Use Agents Serving Diverse Personas

Source: https://huggingface.co/papers/2610.22990 Authors:

,

,

,

,

,

,

,

,

,

,

,

,

,

,

,

,

,

,

,

,

Abstract

PersonaCUABench reveals that computer-use agents frequently fail to satisfy real user requirements and constraints, reducing task completion and satisfaction compared to fixed benchmark instructions.

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 introducePersonaCUABench, which holds 74 tasks across 11 domains fixed and varies only who asks. Apersona 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), meantask completionfalls 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 ontask completionbut 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

View arXiv pageView PDFProject pageGitHub2Add to collection

Get this paper in your agent:

hf papers read 2610\.22990

Don’t have the latest CLI?curl \-LsSf https://hf\.co/cli/install\.sh \| bash

Models citing this paper0

No model linking this paper

Cite arxiv.org/abs/2610.22990 in a model README.md to link it from this page.

Datasets citing this paper0

No dataset linking this paper

Cite arxiv.org/abs/2610.22990 in a dataset README.md to link it from this page.

Spaces citing this paper0

No Space linking this paper

Cite arxiv.org/abs/2610.22990 in a Space README.md to link it from this page.

Collections including this paper0

No Collection including this paper

Add this paper to acollectionto link it from this page.

Similar Articles

MedCUA-Bench: A Screenshot-Only Benchmark for Clinical Computer-Use Agents

arXiv cs.AI

MedCUA-Bench is a new benchmark for evaluating computer-use agents on clinical software tasks, covering 18 scenarios across 10 medical domains with safety dimensions. Results show that current agents perform poorly, especially on real OpenEMR, highlighting a significant gap in reliability.

MyPCBench: A Benchmark for Personally Intelligent Computer-Use Agents

Hugging Face Daily Papers

MyPCBench evaluates computer-use agents as personal assistants in a simulated Linux desktop environment with real-world web applications, revealing that Claude Opus 4.6 achieves the highest task completion rate of 55.4% while struggling with multi-application tasks and long trajectories.

PersonaChatBench: Evaluating Chat Assistants with Diverse Simulated Users

arXiv cs.CL

The paper introduces PersonaChatBench, a framework that evaluates 20 language models across six domains by pairing fixed tasks with diverse simulated users guided by private persona cards, measuring task outcomes, persona need fulfillment, and simulator fidelity. Results show that strong task performance does not consistently translate into satisfying individual user needs, with model strengths varying across personas and domains.