Current autonomous workplace agents collapse under dozens of interleaved long-horizon tasks, but CorpGen — using hierarchical planning, sub-agent isolation and tiered memory — boosts completion rates up to 3.5× and preserves performance as workload increases.

Main Finding

CORPGEN defines a new problem class—Multi-Horizon Task Environments (MHTEs)—and shows that standard single-task long-horizon agents fail catastrophically as concurrent task load grows. The CORPGEN framework (hierarchical planning, sub-agent isolation, tiered memory, adaptive summarization, experiential learning) substantially mitigates these failures: across multiple computer-using-agent (CUA) backends it achieves stable performance under rising load and up to ~3.5× improvement over baselines (e.g., 15.2% vs 4.3% task completion in one reported comparison). Experiential learning delivers the largest single architectural gain.

Key Points

• New problem class (MHTE): dozens of concurrent long-horizon tasks (45+ tasks, 500–1500+ total steps, persistent context spanning hours). MHTEs are qualitatively different from single-task long-horizon benchmarks.
• Four principal failure modes when using standard CUAs in MHTEs:
• Context saturation — context needs grow O(N) with task count and exhaust token windows.
• Cross-task memory interference — task states contaminate one another.
• Dependency complexity — cross-task dependencies form DAGs/cycles, requiring scheduling/topological reasoning.
• Reprioritization overhead — per-cycle decision complexity grows O(N), causing thrashing.
• CORPGEN architecture (architecture-agnostic) addresses each failure mode via:
  • Hierarchical planning: strategic (monthly) → tactical (daily) → operational (per-cycle) to amortize reprioritization and preserve high-level goals.
  • Sub-agents-as-tools: isolated sub-agents (e.g., research agent, CUA) that return structured outputs preventing context pollution.
  • Tiered memory: working memory (intra-cycle), structured long-term memory (typed artifacts/plans), semantic memory (embedding-based retrieval) to avoid storing all active states in the token window.
  • Adaptive summarization: rule-based compression to bound token use.
  • Experiential learning and cognitive tools for continual improvement.
• Empirical evidence: across three independent CUA implementations (UFO2, OpenAI/preview CUA, hierarchical CUA), baselines degrade consistently as load increases (examples: 16.7%→8.7%; 8.3%→4.3%; 25.0%→14.1% task completion). CORPGEN sustains or improves performance under load. Ablations show experiential learning most important.
• Evaluation insight: artifact-based judgment (assessing produced artifacts) aligns better with human labels than trace-based LLM judgment, implying some standard evaluation approaches underestimate long-horizon agent performance.

Data & Methods

• Environment: OSWorld Office (simulated corporate workspace with GUI-based applications and persistent digital employee identities and schedules).
• Task setup (MHTE): sets of 45+ concurrent tasks, each 10–30+ steps; aggregate 500–1500+ action steps per execution context spanning hours.
• Agents: digital employees implemented as LLM-powered agents interacting via GUI automation; experiments run across three CUA backends (UFO2, OpenAI CUA, hierarchical CUA).
• Metrics: aggregate task completion rate across the MHTE during a persistent execution session; reported performance versus task load (25%→100%).
• Experiments: baseline CUAs versus CORPGEN-wired agents; ablation studies removing CORPGEN components to measure contribution (experiential learning largest contribution).
• Additional evaluation: comparison of artifact-based vs trace-based evaluation methods and preliminary studies on agreement with human labels.
• Key quantitative signals reported:
  • Baseline degradation with load (consistent across CUAs).
  • CORPGEN improves task completion up to ~3.5× in some comparisons (e.g., 15.2% vs 4.3%).
  • Experiential learning provided the largest single ablation gain.

Implications for AI Economics

• Productivity and automation potential
  • Digital employees that manage many concurrent long-horizon tasks could substantially raise productivity in office workflows that involve coordination, scheduling, document preparation, and cross-application work.
  • Gains depend heavily on architectural design (tiered memory, sub-agents, hierarchical planning), implying that returns to investment accrue to firms that adopt higher-quality agent infrastructure rather than to generic LLM access alone.
• Capital vs labor: adoption and investment patterns
  • CORPGEN-like systems represent a capital investment (software architecture, integration, data pipelines, agent orchestration). Economic gains are contingent on these investments, suggesting complementarities between organizational capital and AI labor-substituting technologies.
  • Early adopters who internalize architecture/experiential-learning pipelines may capture disproportionate productivity rents.
• Task-level heterogeneity and labor displacement
  • Roles characterized by many concurrent, interdependent long-horizon tasks (project managers, program coordinators, administrative staff, some knowledge-worker roles) are most exposed to automation under MHTE-capable agents.
  • However, automation requires integration costs, domain-specific grounding, and persistent memory; tasks needing high ambiguity resolution, human relationships, or accountability may be less automatable.
• Organizational design and complementarities
  • Hierarchical planning and sub-agent isolation map naturally onto organizational hierarchies and role specializations (e.g., digital assistants delegated specific functions). Firms may redesign task allocation and managerial spans to leverage agent strengths.
  • Agents that reduce managerial overhead (reprioritization, scheduling) can alter the optimal mix of human managerial labor and AI assistants, potentially reducing middle-management load while increasing demand for roles that supervise, audit, and curate agent behavior.
• Measurement and evaluation for economic research
  • Standard single-task benchmarks understate agents' value in realistic, multi-task settings. Economic assessments (productivity studies, field experiments) should use MHTE-style evaluations to measure true workplace automation potential.
  • Artifact-based evaluation (assessing outputs produced) may be a more reliable method to estimate real-world effectiveness than trace-based judgments.
• Market and pricing effects
  • Firms providing agent orchestration frameworks, sub-agent modules, and experiential-learning services may become valuable platforms; pricing could reflect architecture quality (tiered memory, learning loops) more than raw LLM compute.
  • A market for “digital employee” assets (role templates, memory stores, experiential trajectories) could emerge; such assets have firm-specific value, increasing switching costs.
• Policy and distributional concerns
  • Displacement risk concentrated in roles with high concurrency of tasks; targeted retraining and reallocation policies may be required.
  • Data privacy, persistent identities, and auditability become key regulatory concerns when agents operate across corporate communications and artifacts.
• Research priorities for AI economics
  • Model productivity gains as a function of task load N and architecture quality: quantify how much hierarchical planning, tiered memory, and experiential learning reduce marginal cost per additional concurrent task.
  • Empirically study diffusion: firm-level heterogeneity in adoption given up-front architecture costs and ongoing learning returns.
  • Investigate complementarities: which human skills complement MHTE-capable agents (oversight, exception handling, creative synthesis) and how wages/skill premiums evolve.
  • Expand empirical evaluation beyond simulated environments to field trials testing real productivity, integration costs, error rates, and human supervision requirements.

Limitations to bear in mind - Results are from a simulated corporate environment (OSWorld Office) and controlled CUAs; real-world deployment faces additional issues (heterogeneous enterprise software, privacy constraints, human acceptance, regulatory compliance). - Reported completion rates are low in absolute terms (single-digit to low-double-digit percentages); improvements are relative and further engineering is needed for production-grade reliability. - Economic impacts hinge on integration costs, robustness, and the quality/quantity of data available for experiential learning—factors that vary across firms and sectors.