Abstract
Static coding benchmarks are fixed at release. Over time their tasks leak into training data, and stronger agents eventually saturate them. We argue that a benchmark should instead aim to be self-scaling: its tasks and oracles are created at evaluation time, so no content exists in advance to leak, and its difficulty is set by the participating agents rather than fixed at release. We introduce SWE-Duel, an arena in which two coding agents evaluate each other over mirrored Red-Blue turns. In each turn, the Red agent works on a real repository across three context-isolated sessions. It proposes and implements a new feature with feature tests, then embeds a subtle bug in that feature along with sealed bug-triggering tests. The resulting pull request is admitted only if (1) it passes the feature tests and the repository's existing tests while failing exactly the bug tests, and (2) a fresh session of the same agent can repair the bug blind, which rules out unsolvable tasks. The Blue agent then reviews the pull request without being told a bug exists. It wins only if its revision passes all three test suites, and then the two agents swap roles. We run a tournament among 11 model-harness participants on 15 repositories in five languages for 1,500 turns. The leaders win in different ways. GPT-5.5 with Codex CLI ranks first as the strongest solver, repairing 98.3% of the defects it reviews. Claude Opus 4.8 with mini-swe-agent ranks second as the strongest task author, with a 27.3% Red win rate. Finally, within one model family, tasks written by the newest version defeat a fixed-reference solver far more often than those of older versions (42.9% vs. 4.0%), giving preliminary evidence that task difficulty scales with task authoring capability.
Community
Hi everyone👋
Static coding benchmarks don't last long. Their tasks leak into training data, and stronger agents saturate them. In SWE-Duel, we try a different approach: coding agents create tasks for each other at evaluation time, so there's nothing to leak in advance, and the difficulty grows with the agents themselves.
How it works: two agents take turns as Red and Blue on a real repository.
- Red adds a new feature, then hides a subtle bug in it, with sealed tests that trigger the bug. The task only counts if a fresh session of the same agent can fix the bug blind, so there are no unsolvable tasks.
- Blue reviews the PR without being told there's a bug. It wins only if its revision passes the feature tests, the existing tests, and the hidden bug tests.
Then they swap roles.
We ran 1,500 turns with 11 model-harness pairs on 15 repos in 5 languages. A few findings:
- GPT-5.5 + Codex CLI ranks 1st as the strongest solver, fixing 98.3% of the bugs it reviews.
- Claude Opus 4.8 + mini-swe-agent ranks 2nd as the strongest task author, with a 27.3% Red win rate.
- Within one model family, tasks written by the newest version beat a fixed reference solver far more often than those from older versions (42.9% vs. 4.0%). This suggests task difficulty scales with the agents' own ability.
Happy to answer any questions!
Get this paper in your agent:
hf papers read 2610.12569 Don't have the latest CLI?
curl -LsSf https://hf.co/cli/install.sh | bash Models citing this paper 0
No model linking this paper
Datasets citing this paper 0
No dataset linking this paper
Spaces citing this paper 1
Collections including this paper 0
No Collection including this paper