TSR Desk · science · 21 September 2026, 07:00 UTC
GameLogicBench: Evaluating Coding Agents on Runtime Game Logic with Tick-Level State Assertions
- What
- GameLogicBench: Evaluating Coding Agents on Runtime Game Logic with Tick-Level State Assertions
- Who
- arxiv.org
- When
- 21 September 2026, 04:00 UTC
- Category
- Science
- Primary source
- https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.21562
- What is not known
- This brief does not claim independent replication. Claims that appear only on X and not in the primary source stay unknown.
However, no existing benchmark checks game rules throughout execution across varied evaluator-selected scenarios while ensuring exactly reproducible verdicts. It comes from a paper posted to arXiv on 21 September 2026. Coding agents can modify and test code across large software projects. Game development is a domain where agents must implement gameplay rules. A game can end in a valid state even after violating its rules during the run. Current game-development benchmarks replay fixed examples, score videos, or ask another model to judge the result. We introduce GameLogicBench, a benchmark of 72 gameplay-logic tasks in Godot projects. An automated evaluator checks each game's rules at every simulation tick. Across 403 hand-designed scenarios, seeded parameter variations produce 1,451 test cases. To ensure that the evaluator measures behavior rather than implementation choice, it must accept different correct implementations for each task while rejecting mutants, implementations with one required capability removed. The tasks span isolated mechanics, multi-system interactions, and repository-scale features. Across 20 combinations of language models and scaffolds, the best observed run solves 52.78% of tasks. Under Claude Code, all twelve models solve fewer tasks as task scope expands from isolated mechanics, through interacting systems, to repository-scale features. Agents inspect code more often and make more tool calls on repository-scale tasks than on isolated-mechanic tasks. Most unsuccessful submissions are runnable, but implement some required game behavior incorrectly. We compared versions of our benchmark evaluator built with and without validation using mutants. Without this validation, incorrect agent submissions passed. A separate analysis finds agents copying code from public repositories when network access is open. Reliable evaluation thus depends both on what the tests reject and on what external code agents can access.
Why it counts
However, no existing benchmark checks game rules throughout execution across varied evaluator-selected scenarios while ensuring exactly reproducible verdicts. We introduce GameLogicBench, a benchmark of 72 gameplay-logic tasks in Godot projects. We compared versions of our benchmark evaluator built with and without validation using mutants.
Sources
Primary source: primary source
What is not known
This brief does not claim independent replication. Claims that appear only on X and not in the primary source stay unknown.
No clip. The article still stands.