Born out of a Stanford course project · AI Measurement Science源自斯坦福课程项目 · AI 测量科学

A right answer doesn't mean it reasoned right.答对了,不代表它想对了

Today's agent evals only tell you whether it passed — not how it thought. AgentIRT scores every reasoning step and shows you where it breaks — before it ships, before it fails.今天的智能体评测只告诉你它有没有通过 —— 不告诉你它是怎么想的。AgentIRT 为每一步推理打分,指出它在哪里断裂 —— 在上线前,在出事前。

Independent独立 · we don't build the agents we assess不评估自己造的智能体
Process-level过程级 · every reasoning step, scored每一步推理都打分
API-firstAPI 优先 · we read traces, never your weights只读推理日志,不碰你的模型权重
Why now为什么是现在

Agents are making real decisions — and no one can see the reasoning.智能体已在做真实决策 —— 却没人看得见它的推理。

The shift转变

From demos to production从演示走向生产

Agents now decide refunds, loans, and prescriptions — autonomously, at scale. The cost of a wrong call is no longer hypothetical.智能体如今自主、大规模地决定退款、信贷与处方。决策出错的代价不再是假设。

The pressure压力

Regulation is arriving监管正在到来

The EU AI Act puts high-risk systems under conformity obligations; the FDA scrutinizes clinical decision support. Both ask how the system reasoned — not just what it answered.EU AI Act 将高风险系统纳入合规义务;FDA 审视临床决策支持。两者都追问系统如何推理 —— 而不只是答了什么。

The gap缺口

Evals haven't caught up评测没跟上

Pass/fail still grades the answer, not the reasoning. The one thing now being asked for is the one thing today's evals can't show.通过/失败仍只评答案、不评推理。如今被要求的那样东西,恰是今天的评测给不出的。

So the question is no longer can an agent act — but which agent can you trust?所以问题不再是 agent 能不能行动 —— 而是你能信任哪一个?

01
Pillar one · what we measure支柱一 · 我们测什么
We measure the reasoning — not just the answer.我们测量推理本身 —— 而不只是答案。
One failure mode · three high-stakes scenarios一种失效模式 · 三个高风险场景

"Right answer, broken reasoning" is a time bomb in every high-stakes setting."答案对、推理断",在每一个高风险场景里都是一颗定时炸弹

Teams shipping agents上线智能体的团队
Support agent processing a refund客服智能体处理一笔退款
Understand the request理解请求θ.91
Pull order data调取订单数据θ.88
Pick the refund rule选择退款规则θ.84
Check eligibility核对资格BREAKS
Send the reply发送回复θ.86
Reply looks right ✓回复看起来对 ✓ but step 4 already broke — lucky this time, wrong the next.但第 4 步已经断了 —— 这次走运,下次出错。 Cost: wrong refund / wrongful denial, escalations, money quietly leaking.代价:错误退款/误拒、工单升级、资金悄悄流失。
Why "it passed testing" isn't enough为什么"它通过了测试"还不够
  1. Passing tests ≠ sound reasoning.通过测试 ≠ 推理可靠。 It may have just gotten lucky on the cases you happened to test — real inputs expose it.它可能只是在你恰好测到的样例上走运 —— 真实输入会暴露它。
  2. At scale, the fragile step breaks on edge / adversarial inputs.规模化后,脆弱的那步会在边缘/对抗输入上断裂。 Not occasionally — eventually, and at scale.不是偶尔,而是迟早,且成规模地发生。
  3. When it fails, pass/fail can't help you fix it.出错时,通过/不通过帮不了你修复。 You can't see which step broke — only re-run the full benchmark and guess.你看不到是哪一步断的 —— 只能重跑整个基准再猜。
AgentIRT gives you a failure map of which step breaks:AgentIRT 给你一张"哪一步断裂"的失效地图: locate the break from a few tasks, know what to fix, re-test fast to confirm no regression — without a full re-run.用少量任务定位断点、知道要修什么、快速复测确认无回退 —— 无需重跑全量。
Regulators & enterprises监管者与企业
Credit agent reviewing a loan application信贷智能体审核一笔贷款申请
Read the application阅读申请θ.90
Check income vs. debt核对收入与负债θ.88
Pull credit history调取征信记录θ.86
Assess default risk评估违约风险BREAKS
Return "Approve"返回"批准"θ.85
Verdict "Approve" ✓结论"批准" ✓ but the risk-assessment reasoning broke — the answer looks compliant, the process doesn't hold.但风险评估那步推理断了 —— 答案看起来合规,过程却站不住。 Cost: a loan that shouldn't have been approved; and under audit, no evidence of how it reasoned.代价:一笔本不该批的贷款;而在审计时,拿不出它如何推理的证据。
Why regulators will scrutinize this step为什么监管会审视这一步
  1. Credit decisions are a "high-risk system"信贷决策属于"高风险系统" (EU AI Act, Annex III 5(b)). Before deployment they require conformity assessment (Art. 43), plus documentation, logging, human oversight that can override, and the ability to explain the basis to a rejected applicant.(EU AI Act 附件 III 5(b))。部署前需通过合规评估(第 43 条),并需文档、日志、可推翻的人工监督,以及向被拒申请人解释依据的能力。
  2. Pass/fail proves the result, not the process.通过/不通过只证明结果,不证明过程。 Step 4 broke silently — you hold no evidence the reasoning was sound.第 4 步悄无声息地断了 —— 你手里没有推理可靠的证据。
  3. Market surveillance authorities can demand that evidence anytime.市场监管机构可随时索要该证据。 "A human approved it" is no defense — regulators flag exactly that as the most common failure."有人工批过"不是抗辩 —— 监管恰恰把这点列为最常见的失效。
  4. Penalties up to €15M or 3% of global turnover罚则最高 1500 万欧元或全球营业额 3% (whichever is higher).(取高者)。
This is the layer AgentIRT supplies:这正是 AgentIRT 提供的那一层: score and log every reasoning step into auditable evidence — proving the system didn't just answer right, but reasoned right.把每一步推理打分并记录成可审计的证据 —— 证明系统不只是答对,而是想对了。
Safety-critical domains安全攸关领域
AI reviewing a prescription for drug interactionsAI 审查处方的药物相互作用
Read medication history阅读用药史θ.92
Identify the new drug识别新药θ.89
Query interaction database查询相互作用数据库θ.85
Judge contraindications判断禁忌症BREAKS
Reply "safe to co-prescribe"回复"可联合用药"θ.87
Reply "safe to prescribe" ✓回复"可安全用药" ✓ but step 4 missed a contraindication — the clinician sees a "right" answer, not the broken step.但第 4 步漏判了一个禁忌症 —— 医生看到的是"对"的答案,不是那断裂的一步。 Cost: a missed contraindication can lead to patient harm; fine this time, harmful the next.代价:漏判禁忌可致患者伤害;这次没事,下次出事。
Why this is an FDA compliance issue为什么这是 FDA 合规问题
  1. This software falls under FDA's Clinical Decision Support (CDS).这类软件属于 FDA 的临床决策支持(CDS)。 Whether it's a regulated medical device hinges on one thing: can the clinician independently review the basis for the recommendation, rather than rely primarily on the conclusion (FD&C Act §520(o)(1)(E), criterion 4)?它是否被当作受监管的医疗器械,取决于一点:医生能否独立审查建议的依据,而非主要依赖结论(FD&C 法案 §520(o)(1)(E),第 4 条标准)?
  2. If the reasoning is a black box the clinician can't review,若推理是医生无法审查的黑箱, it may no longer qualify as exempt CDS and may be regulated as a medical device, with a far higher bar.它可能不再属于豁免的 CDS,而被当作医疗器械监管,门槛大幅提高。
  3. The bigger danger is automation bias:更大的风险是自动化偏见: the answer looks right, the clinician follows it, and the broken step goes unnoticed. FDA's 2026 guidance flags this directly.答案看着对,医生照做,断裂的那步无人察觉。FDA 2026 指南直接点了这一点。
This is the layer AgentIRT supplies:这正是 AgentIRT 提供的那一层: it breaks every reasoning step (including the missed contraindication) into scored, logged evidence — making "the basis can be independently reviewed" provable and auditable.它把每一步推理(包括漏判的禁忌)拆成可打分、可记录的证据 —— 让"依据可被独立审查"变得可证、可审计。
Live demo · paste a reasoning trace在线演示 · 粘贴一段推理过程

See your own agent's reasoning X-rayed.给你自己智能体的推理做一次X 光

Paste a step-by-step reasoning trace (chain-of-thought, tool calls — one step per line). It's broken into steps, each scored, with the weak step flagged — then a 5-ability profile and a drill-down into the weakest.粘贴一段逐步的推理过程(思维链、工具调用 —— 每行一步)。它会被拆成步骤、逐步打分、标出薄弱步 —— 再给出 5 维能力画像并下钻到最弱维度。

Illustrative demo — scores are generated in your browser to show what a report looks like,演示用途 —— 分数在你浏览器本地生成,仅展示报告样式, not real measurements非真实测量.
Reasoning trace推理过程
Tip: one step per line. Try a preset, or paste your agent's real trace.提示:每行一步。试试预设,或粘贴你智能体的真实过程。
Add at least 2 steps (2 lines) to analyze.至少输入 2 步(2 行)再分析。
θ

Paste a trace and hit Analyze. Your step-by-step report appears here.粘贴过程并点分析,逐步报告会出现在这里。

Per-step reasoning score逐步推理评分
5-dimension ability profile5 维能力画像

Illustrative demo. Scoring here is a lightweight client-side heuristic for demonstration — production runs your real trace through the live AgentIRT (Process-IRT) engine. The sub-skill taxonomy shown is a proposed draft, to be replaced with your validated definitions.演示用途。此处评分为用于展示的轻量客户端启发式 —— 正式版会把你的真实推理过程交给在线 AgentIRT(Process-IRT)引擎。所示子技能分类法为提议草稿,将替换为你校验过的定义。

The measurement science测量科学

An X-ray for agent reasoning.一台给智能体推理拍片的X 光机

The same Item Response Theory (IRT) psychometrics use to measure human ability — adapted to grade each step a machine takes.与心理测量学衡量人类能力所用的同一套项目反应理论(IRT)—— 被改造来为机器走的每一步打分。

01

Trace the reasoning追踪推理

Break a run into discrete reasoning steps and tool calls — the "items" to be scored.把一次运行拆成离散的推理步骤与工具调用 —— 即待评分的"题项"。

02

Grade with IRT用 IRT 评分

Separate "step difficulty" from "agent ability" — harder steps done right count for more.将"步骤难度"与"智能体能力"分离 —— 难步做对,权重更高。

Process-IRT
03

Profile 5 abilities画 5 维能力

Multidimensional IRT resolves the score into a 5D profile, not one risk-hiding number.多维 IRT 把分数分解成 5 维画像,而非一个掩盖风险的数字。

5D-MIRT
04

Govern & evidence治理与取证

Adaptive testing reaches reliable conclusions from fewer tasks, producing auditable inputs for your compliance assessment.自适应测试用更少任务得出可靠结论,为你的合规评估产出可审计的输入。

Adaptive CAT
The science it rests on它所依据的科学
Item Response Theory (IRT)项目反应理论(IRT)
A peer-reviewed psychometric framework that separates latent ability from item difficulty — so doing harder things right counts for more, and scores can't be inflated by a pile of easy tasks. The same foundation behind standardized ability testing.一套同行评审的心理测量框架,将潜在能力与题项难度分离 —— 把难的事做对权重更高,分数无法靠堆简单任务刷高。这也是标准化能力测试背后的同一基础。
Process-level measurement过程级测量
We apply this measurement to the reasoning process, not only the final answer — which is what makes it possible to locate where reasoning breaks rather than only whether it passed.我们把这套测量用于推理过程,而不只是最终答案 —— 这正是"能定位推理在哪断裂"而非"只知道过没过"的关键。
Multidimensional ability profiling多维能力画像
Multidimensional IRT resolves a single score into a profile across several ability dimensions, surfacing structural weaknesses that a single average hides.多维 IRT 把单一分数分解成跨多个能力维度的画像,暴露被单一平均值掩盖的结构性弱点。
Adaptive testing自适应测试
The same principle behind computer-adaptive exams (GRE, GMAT): reach a reliable conclusion from far fewer, well-chosen tasks — directly cutting evaluation cost.与计算机自适应考试(GRE、GMAT)同一原理:用远更少、精挑的任务得出可靠结论 —— 直接降低评估成本。

We describe the science we build on, not our implementation. Item banks, calibration, and parameterization are proprietary.此处描述我们所依据的科学,而非具体实现。题库、参数标定与建模为专有技术。

Measurement that improves what it measures让被测对象变得更好的测量
θ
Measure测量
Score every reasoning step为每一步推理打分
Locate the break定位断点
Pinpoint the weak sub-skill锁定薄弱子技能
+
Strengthen补强
Add the targeted data (you do this)补充定向数据(由你完成)
Re-measure重测
Confirm θ rose, no regression确认 θ 上升、无回退

Each cycle sharpens the agent and the item bank — a loop that compounds, for you and for us.每一轮循环都让智能体题库更锐利 —— 一个不断累积的闭环,对你、对我们都是。

02
Pillar two · fast & actionable支柱二 · 高效且可执行
A confident verdict from a few questions — and a path to fix.少量问题就给出可信结论 —— 并指明如何修复。
Selection · fast assessment · save tokens选型 · 快速评估 · 省 token

A few questions reveal how capable an agent is — and whether it holds up.几道题就能看出一个智能体有多强 —— 以及它稳不稳

Choosing between models or agents, running each through a full benchmark is slow and token-expensive. Adaptive testing picks only the most informative tasks — fewer questions, same confidence.在多个模型或智能体之间选型时,让每个跑完整基准既慢又费 token。自适应测试只挑信息量最大的任务 —— 更少的题,同样的置信度。

Traditional full benchmark传统全量基准
200 questions · 100% tokens · slow200 题 · 100% token · 慢
Ability estimate能力估计 θ 0.71 ± 0.04
AgentIRT adaptiveAgentIRT 自适应
12 questions · ~6% tokens · fast12 题 · 约 6% token · 快
θ 0.71 ± 0.04 same confidence同样置信度

It's not "fewer questions, so rougher" — each question is chosen for maximum information given the last answer, so fewer questions reach the same confidence. (Computer-adaptive GRE and TOEFL have worked this way for decades.)这不是"题少所以更粗" —— 每道题都根据上一题的作答挑选信息量最大的下一题,所以更少的题也能达到相同置信度。(计算机自适应的 GRE、TOEFL 已这样运作几十年。)

And you don't get one score — you get a 5D profile: select on the dimension you care about most — safety for medicine, goal adherence for support.而且你得到的不是一个分数,而是一张 5 维画像:按你最在意的维度选型 —— 医疗看安全,客服看目标遵循。

Illustrative figures shown to explain how adaptive testing works — not benchmarked results.此处为说明自适应原理的示意数字 —— 非基准测试结果。

Ability profile · drill into weak sub-skills能力画像 · 下钻到薄弱子技能

Not just which dimension is weak — which sub-skill, and what to add.不只是哪个维度弱 —— 而是哪个子技能弱、该补什么。

One number hides the risk; a profile reveals it. Click any dimension and multidimensional IRT resolves it into specific sub-skills — weaknesses become visible, with the direction and data to add.一个数字会掩盖风险;一张画像会暴露它。点击任一维度,多维 IRT 将其分解为具体子技能 —— 弱点一目了然,并给出补强方向与数据。

Ability profile · sample agent · click to drill down能力画像 · 示例智能体 · 点击下钻
Sub-skill detail · threshold 0.60子技能详情 · 阈值 0.60
Remediation path补强路径
    AgentIRT only measures and locates: it points to the weak skill and the data to add. Model changes are made by you — we stay neutral and never touch your model.AgentIRT 只测量与定位:指出薄弱技能与该补的数据。模型改动由你完成 —— 我们保持中立,绝不触碰你的模型。
    03
    Pillar three · why trust us支柱三 · 为什么信我们
    Independent by construction — trust you can audit.构造上的独立 —— 可被审计的信任。
    Why us为什么是我们

    A model maker can't be both the player and the referee.模型厂商不能既当运动员又当裁判。

    A lab grading its own agent is a structural conflict of interest — regulators won't accept it, and enterprises shouldn't. AgentIRT is independent by construction.实验室给自家智能体打分是结构性利益冲突 —— 监管不会接受,企业也不该接受。AgentIRT 从构造上就独立。

    Independent by construction构造上的独立

    Our independent assessment never grades an agent we built. We point the engine at our own BioAgent for internal QA — but a neutral assessment is only ever issued to agents we don't own.我们的独立评估从不评判自己造的智能体。我们把引擎对准自家 BioAgent 做内部 QA —— 但中立评估只发给我们不拥有的智能体。

    Science, not vibes靠科学,不靠感觉

    Built on decades of peer-reviewed psychometric theory, and falsifiable — not one LLM judging another.建立在数十年同行评审的心理测量理论之上,且可证伪 —— 不是一个大模型评判另一个。

    Regulation is a tailwind监管是顺风

    EU AI Act Art. 43 demands independent conformity assessment — we supply auditable evidence as an input to it; the compliance determination remains yours and your counsel's.EU AI Act 第 43 条要求独立合规评估 —— 我们提供可审计的证据作为其输入;合规判定仍归你与你的法律顾问。

    A compounding data moat持续累积的数据护城河

    Every agent we measure sharpens the item bank. The more we measure, the harder we are to catch — a flywheel newcomers can't buy.每测量一个智能体,题库就更锐利一分。测得越多,越难被追上 —— 这是新进入者买不到的飞轮。

    Who grades the grader?谁给评分者打分?

    Not one LLM rubber-stamping another. Every reasoning step is cross-examined by multiple judges, and each judge is weighted by its proven reliability — anchored to expert-graded ground truth, so an unreliable verdict counts for less.不是一个大模型给另一个盖章。每一步推理由多个评判者交叉复核,且每个评判者按其已验证的可靠度加权 —— 锚定在专家评定的标准答案上,不可靠的判断权重更低。

    Watch · 2 minutes观看 · 2 分钟

    See the measurement, end to end.看一遍完整的测量过程。

    Platform & first application平台与首个应用

    One measurement engine, a family of governed agents.一套测量引擎,一族受治理的智能体。

    We prove the engine on our own hardest agent first — BioAgent, in medtech — then assess the agents we didn't build.我们先在自己最难的智能体上验证引擎 —— 医疗科技领域的 BioAgent —— 再去评估我们没造的智能体。

    First application · Live首个应用 · 已上线

    An AI mentor that invents medical devices, end to end.一位从头到尾发明医疗器械的 AI 导师。

    BioAgent guides medtech innovators through all 6 stages of the Stanford Biodesign process — and every reasoning step it takes is measured and governed by AgentIRT.BioAgent 引导医疗科技创新者走完 Stanford Biodesign 流程的全部 6 个阶段 —— 它走的每一步推理都由 AgentIRT 测量与治理。

    Visit BioAgent →访问 BioAgent → 6 stages · 29 chapters · 148+ substeps6 阶段 · 29 章 · 148+ 子步骤
    148+
    Governed substeps受治理子步骤
    BioAgentOur proving ground · live我们的试验场 · 已上线
    Your agent你的智能体coming soon即将开放
    measured & governed by由其测量与治理
    AgentIRT · Measurement & Governance Engine测量与治理引擎
    Process-IRT5D-MIRTAdaptive CAT
    BioAgent is a proving ground, not a credential:BioAgent 是试验场,不是凭证: the same engine runs internal QA on it, but a neutral assessment is only ever issued to agents we don't own.同一引擎对它做内部 QA,但中立评估只发给我们不拥有的智能体。
    On neutrality关于中立性
    "Wait — you built an agent too (BioAgent). Doesn't that compromise neutrality?""等等 —— 你们自己也造了智能体(BioAgent),这不影响中立吗?"
    Assessment only ever covers agents we didn't build.评估只覆盖我们没造的智能体。 BioAgent is measured by the same engine, but that's internal QA — never sold as third-party neutral assessment.BioAgent 由同一引擎测量,但那是内部 QA —— 绝不作为第三方中立评估出售。
    Neutrality rests on governance, not on "building nothing."中立靠治理,不靠"什么都不造"。 The methodology is public, falsifiable, and open to external and academic review.方法论公开、可证伪,并对外部与学术审查开放。
    BioAgent is a proving ground, not an endorsement.BioAgent 是试验场,不是背书。 We point the engine at our own hardest agent first — medicine, where the cost of broken reasoning is severe. If it holds there, it holds for yours.我们先把引擎对准自己最难的智能体 —— 医疗,推理断裂代价极重。在那里站得住,就在你那里站得住。
    Born out of Stanford · Origin源自斯坦福 · 缘起

    AgentIRT began with a question in a Stanford course project on AI Measurement Science: if we have a rigorous science for measuring human ability, why not use it for machine reasoning? It brings psychometrics out of the classroom and turns it into an independent quality assessment for AI agents.AgentIRT 始于斯坦福一门 AI 测量科学课程项目里的一个问题:既然我们有衡量人类能力的严谨科学,为什么不把它用于机器推理?它把心理测量学带出课堂,变成面向 AI 智能体的独立质量评估。

    Everyone and every company will soon depend on AI agents. The question is no longer whether one can act — but which agent you can trust.每个人、每家公司很快都会依赖 AI 智能体。问题不再是它能不能行动 —— 而是你能信任哪一个。

    AgentIRT turns that question into a measurable, auditable, independent answer.AgentIRT 把这个问题变成一个可测量、可审计、独立的答案。

    Early access早期访问

    Join the waitlist加入候补名单

    Be first to measure and govern your agent. Early partners get priority access.率先测量与治理你的智能体。早期合作伙伴享优先接入。

    No spam · Strictly confidential · Unsubscribe anytime无垃圾邮件 · 严格保密 · 随时退订 · Privacy policy隐私政策