bioRxivBioinformaticsPreprint
FlowBench: separating planning, fault recovery and interpretation in agentic bioinformatics
Abstract
AO_SCPLOWBSTRACTC_SCPLOWAgentic large language model (LLM) systems are being deployed in bioinformatics faster than they are understood, and single-metric evaluations conflate capabilities that fail independently. We introduce FlowBench, a benchmark that decomposes agentic bioinformatics performance into planning, fault recovery, biological interpretation, and end-to-end output-fidelity. Existing systems achieve high plan completeness, but their closed, single-provider designs prevent attribution of performance to scaffolding versus the underlying model. We therefore built FlowAgent, a modular, provider-agnostic framework whose components can be selectively disabled and whose backbone model can be swapped across providers on a shared harness, and used it to evaluate 23 models from three main providers. Three findings emerge. First, generating a valid workflow plan from a named toolchain is largely solved, whereas inferring an appropriate toolchain from biological intent alone is uniformly difficult regardless of model tier, compressing all models into a narrow 44-57% pass-rate band. Second, ablation shows that the dependency-structured plan and a completeness-reflection step drive performance, while adding a same-context validator-driven retry makes structural quality worse. Third, fault recovery and data-grounded interpretation remain unsolved. Models frequently propose fixes that force a clean exit while leaving the underlying data invalid, and data-grounded interpretation lags internal-knowledge recall by a consistent margin. Safety does not emerge from capability, and reasoning-tier models were among the least reliable at recognising unrecoverable faults. Once planning saturates, agent architecture and refusal calibration, not model scale, are the productive frontier. Availability and implementationFlowAgent and FlowBench are available under a GPLv3 licence at https://github.com/EnteloBio/flowagent Contactadam@entelo.bio
- research focus: benchmarking
- research focus: software / tool
- approach: benchmark study
- approach: experimental assay
- Citations
- 0
Reproducibility ledger
Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.
Sign in to file a reproducibility report.
Related papers
- PromptBio-Bench: Benchmarking LLM-based Bioinformatics Agents for End-to-End Data Analysis
Wenbin Guo, Minzhe Zhang, … Shashi Dhar·bioRxiv·Jun 1, 2026
- BioML-bench: Evaluation of AI Agents for End-to-End Biomedical ML
Henry E. Miller, Matthew Greenig, … Bo Wang·bioRxiv·Sep 1, 2025
- BiomniBench: Process-level Evaluation of LLM Agents for Real-world Biomedical Research
Yuanhao Qu, Yingzhou Lu, … Kexin Huang·bioRxiv·May 18, 2026
- Agentic systems are adept at solving well-scoped, verifiable problems in computational biology
Surag Nair, Laura M. Gunsalus, … Gökçen Eraslan·bioRxiv·May 3, 2026
- Skill-Augmented Frontier Agents Nearly Saturate BixBench-Verified-50
Xiaoyu Zhang·bioRxiv·May 1, 2026
- Evaluating open LLMs for agentic analysis orchestration in a typical biomedical lab
Anton Nekrutenko·bioRxiv·May 18, 2026