Ameet Talwalkar
Author directory2026
Scaling Collaborative Effort with Agents
Shannon Zejiang Shen | Valerie Chen | Ken Gu | Alexis Ross | Zixian Ma | Jillian Ross | Alex Gu | Chenglei Si | Wayne Chi | Andi Peng | Jocelyn J Shen | Ameet Talwalkar | Tongshuang Wu | David Sontag
Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL 2026
Shannon Zejiang Shen | Valerie Chen | Ken Gu | Alexis Ross | Zixian Ma | Jillian Ross | Alex Gu | Chenglei Si | Wayne Chi | Andi Peng | Jocelyn J Shen | Ameet Talwalkar | Tongshuang Wu | David Sontag
Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL 2026
Current evaluations of agents remain centered around one-shot task completion, failing to account for the inherently iterative and collaborative nature of many real-world problems, where human goals are often underspecified and evolve. We argue for a shift from building and assessing task completion agents to developing collaborative agents, assessed not only by the quality of their final outputs but by how well they engage with and enhance human effort throughout the problem-solving process. To support this shift, we introduce collaborative effort scaling, a framework that captures how an agent’s utility grows with increasing user involvement. Through case studies and simulated evaluations, we show that state-of-the-art agents often underperform in multi-turn, real-world scenarios, revealing a missing ingredient in agent design: the ability to sustain engagement and scaffold user understanding. Collaborative effort scaling offers a lens for diagnosing agent behavior and guiding development toward more effective interactions.
ReproRepo: Scaling Reproducibility Audits with GitHub Repository Issues
Shanda Li | Qiuhong Anna Wei | Jingwu Tang | Valerie Chen | Nihar B Shah | Tim Dettmers | Yiming Yang | Ameet Talwalkar
Proceedings of the 2026 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing
Shanda Li | Qiuhong Anna Wei | Jingwu Tang | Valerie Chen | Nihar B Shah | Tim Dettmers | Yiming Yang | Ameet Talwalkar
Proceedings of the 2026 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing
Reproducing research results from papers and released code is central to scientific progress. Existing works have introduced benchmarks to evaluate whether LLM agents can assist with reproducibility, but they are difficult to scale due to their reliance on substantial manual effort for data curation and evaluation. We introduce ReproRepo, a scalable framework for reproducibility evaluation that leverages human-raised GitHub issues as naturally occurring supervision on realistic reproduction blockers. We instantiate ReproRepo on 1,149 recent machine learning papers from major conferences and evaluate four frontier model-agent configurations. Our results show that LLM agents, even without executing code, can identify many real-world reproducibility problems from paper-repository pairs: the best agent in our study, namely Codex with GPT-5.5, surfaces at least one semantically related human-reported blocker for ∼90% of papers in the study. Further analysis shows that agents are particularly effective for surfacing visible failures and identifying the right semantic region, but may still be insufficient in exact localization. ReproRepo can serve as a reusable, scalable framework for future evaluations of LLM agents on real-world reproducibility auditing. Our code is released at https://github.com/LithiumDA/ReproRepo.
2025
When Benchmarks Talk: Re-Evaluating Code LLMs with Interactive Feedback
Jane Pan | Ryan Shar | Jacob Pfau | Ameet Talwalkar | He He | Valerie Chen
Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL 2025
Jane Pan | Ryan Shar | Jacob Pfau | Ameet Talwalkar | He He | Valerie Chen
Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL 2025
Programming with a coding assistant is a fundamentally interactive process, yet existing static benchmarks fail to capture key features of model-user collaboration. We introduce an interactive evaluation pipeline to examine how LLMs incorporate different types of feedback in a collaborative setting, in which we obfuscate the input of static coding benchmarks so that the code model must interact with a simulated user. Across 10 models and 3 datasets, the relative rankings of models often permute greatly between static and interactive settings, despite models being fairly robust to feedback that contains errors. We also observe that similarly effective feedback types differ in terms of how models respond to higher- vs. lower-quality feedback. Moreover, feedback type impacts the degree to which the models make aesthetic or behavioral edits to their output. Our work aims to “re-evaluate” model coding capabilities through an interactive lens toward bridging the gap between existing evaluations and real-world usage.