Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Preprint

The DOI matches its DataCite record; the references it cites are not checked yet.

WorkflowArena: Benchmarking Executable Workflow Orchestration in LLM-Based Multi-Agent Systems

Jiang, Zheng, Niu, Fang, Peng, Bo, Qian, Houde, Li, Wenyi, Hong, Deyao, Gao, Mingju, Chi, Yizhe, Zheng, Youjie, Yang, Kaisen, Xiao, Calvin, Sun, Lifeng, Gao, Huan-ang·2026·arXiv

Abstract

Large language model agents are increasingly deployed as multi-agent systems rather than as a standalone model operating within a single context. Recent agent harnesses allow the model to instantiate worker agents and to author the executable workflow that coordinates them, shifting the design of system structure from developers to the model at run time. The quality of this organization therefore constitutes a distinct capability, yet existing benchmarks either measure end-to-end task completion or evaluate coordination under structures specified in advance. We formalize this capability as workflow orchestration and introduce WorkflowArena, a benchmark of 145 long-horizon tasks spanning 8 professional domains, from software engineering and formal mathematics to legal analysis and 3D production. Each task specifies an initial workspace and an integrated deliverable composed of interdependent components, which is assessed by a hidden verifier. Agents determine autonomously whether and how to delegate, and all delegation is recorded, enabling joint evaluation of deliverable quality and the organization of the underlying work. Experiments with nine models show that no single configuration performs best across all domains and that systems exhibit distinct delegation strategies: at high effort, Claude models in Claude Code invoke workflows less frequently but with larger worker groups, whereas GPT models in Codex delegate more frequently in smaller units. When the executing model is held fixed on a challenging subset of tasks, workflows authored by Claude Opus 5.5 substantially improve weaker executors, indicating that workflow organization is itself a measurable determinant of task performance.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2611.12856

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Metadata

Authors
Jiang, Z., Niu, F., Peng, B., Qian, H., Li, W., Hong, D., Gao, M., Chi, Y., Zheng, Y., Yang, K., Xiao, C., Sun, L., & Gao, H.-A.
Venue
arXiv
Published
2026
Type
Preprint

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: WorkflowArena: Benchmarking Executable Workflow Orchestration in LLM-Based Multi-Agent Systems. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.48550/arxiv.2611.12856
The paper
Jiang, Z., Niu, F., Peng, B., Qian, H., Li, W., Hong, D., Gao, M., Chi, Y., Zheng, Y., Yang, K., Xiao, C., Sun, L., & Gao, H.-A. (2026). WorkflowArena: Benchmarking Executable Workflow Orchestration in LLM-Based Multi-Agent Systems. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arxiv.2611.12856

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.