Skip to content

Rethinking Inference-Time Scaling in Local Computer-Use Agents: Failure Modes and Compute Tradeoffs

Jul 2026 · arXiv.org · Vol abs/2607.28573 · 0 citations · 18 references
Computer Science

TL;DR

The findings suggest that efficient local CUAs require selective compute allocation, failure-aware control mechanisms, and agentic frameworks designed around the capabilities and limitations of local models.

Abstract

Deploying autonomous computer-use agents (CUAs) locally is increasingly important for privacy, cost efficiency, and practical usability, yet improving their performance under strict hardware constraints remains challenging. While recent studies show that inference-time scaling can improve frontier computer-use agents through additional computation during execution, its effectiveness for resource-constrained local models remains poorly understood. We present a systematic empirical study of inference-time scaling in local CUAs across contextual, temporal, structural, and parallel dimensions. We evaluate Qwen3-VL-8B/30B-A3B, UI-TARS-1.5-7B, and OpenCUA-7B on the OSWorld benchmark. Our results show that additional computation often yields diminishing returns while changing failure modes. Contextual scaling provides historical grounding that improves trajectory stability and task accuracy, but its gains saturate as token cost increases and failures shift from repetitive or stalled trajectories toward premature false successes. Temporal scaling similarly reduces max-step stalls, yet does not substantially improve task success, indicating that longer horizons often extend erroneous trajectories rather than correct them. We further find that structural decomposition can introduce planning and formatting overhead in local two-stage agents, while parallel scaling partially mitigates these failures at a substantial computational cost. Overall, our findings suggest that efficient local CUAs require selective compute allocation, failure-aware control mechanisms, and agentic frameworks designed around the capabilities and limitations of local models.

View source

Similar papers

Preprint Aug 2026

Repair or Resample? Rethinking Failure Debugging in LLM Multi-Agent Systems

This study introduces SymTrace, a controlled evaluation framework that records the MAS execution trajectory and establishes intervention anchors and explores the effectiveness of MAS repair methods, revealing that existing unguided rerun methods are highly unreliable.

Zhong-Wen Luan, Xiaoyan Zhang, Ming Hu et al. · 2 citations
Preprint Aug 2026

Test-Time Scaling in Reasoning LLMs: Inference Regimes, Evaluation, and Reproducibility

This empirical study covers broad knowledge, symbolic reasoning, and competition mathematics, and it introduces an evaluation profile whose coordinates and simple functionals recover or bound common repeated-sampling metrics, and require compute accounting and uncertainty estimates that match the protocol.

Mohsen Hariri, Weicong Chen, Nahal Shahini et al. · 5 citations · ⚡1
Preprint Aug 2026

Thought-Level Beam Search for Reasoning

By periodically pruning unpromising trajectories and immediately branching from high-quality prefixes, Gambit dynamically concentrates compute onto the most promising reasoning traces via a light-weight scorer probing hidden states while maintaining continuous high hardware utilization.

Lijie Yang, Hongyin Luo, Jia-Wei Zhao et al. · 0 citations
Book Open access Jul 2026

Is a Busy Search Agent a Good One? Overthinking and Overretrieval at Scale

This work conducts a systematic study of overthinking and overretrieval in search agents from a scaling perspective and proposes a lightweight post-hoc reflection framework that converts the proposed evaluation signals into explicit feedback rewards to guide agents' reasoning trajectories.

Xin Liu, Ruqing Zhang, Yu-An Liu et al. · 0 citations
Preprint Aug 2026

The Replay Gap: Static Evaluation of Model Switching in LLM Agents Scores the Wrong World

This work forks live SWE-bench agent trajectories at controlled points, rebuild the environment, continue each fork with a different model, and compare against same-model control forks that isolate sampling and replay noise, finding configuration-dependent temperature-0"determinism" is configuration-dependent.

Ashritha Gonuguntla · 6 citations · ⚡1

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.