Opportunity summary
Score7.0Public score shown from the verified overall while the stale axis breakdown refreshesThis canonical paper page includes Commercialization Proof and Related Resources.
ARXIV:2604.26235 · AGENTS · SUBMITTED 30 APR · 15:13 UTC · FRESHNESS STALE
ARXIV:2604.26235AGENTSSUBMITTED 30 APR · 15:13 UTCFRESHNESS STALEAaron Chan · Tengfei Li · Tianyi Xiao · Angela Chen · Junyi Du · Xiang Ren · arXiv
LATTICE is a benchmark for evaluating crypto agents' decision support utility in real-world scenarios, using LLM judges for scalable assessment.
Opportunity summary
Pain LATTICE is a benchmark for evaluating crypto agents' decision support utility in real-world scenarios, using LLM judges for scalable assessment.
Evidence 0 refs | 4 sources | 67% coverage
Blocker Evidence unverified
LATTICE is a benchmark for evaluating crypto agents' decision support utility in real-world scenarios, using LLM judges for scalable assessment. Prior crypto agent benchmarks mainly focus on reasoning-based or outcome-based evaluation, but do not…
We introduce LATTICE, a benchmark for evaluating the decision support utility of crypto agents in realistic user-facing scenarios. Prior crypto agent benchmarks mainly focus on reasoning-based or outcome-based evaluation, but do not assess agents'…
ScienceToStartup currently rates this 7.0/10 on the public viability pass. We introduce LATTICE, a benchmark for evaluating the decision support utility of crypto agents in realistic user-facing scenarios. A public repository is linked, so…
Agents moved forward this cycle; last verified April 2026. Public score 7.0/10. Implementation evidence is present through a linked repository.
Continue into Read for claims, analysis, references, and neighboring papers.
mobile layout uses overflow-hidden min-w-0 break-wordsOpportunity summary
Score7.0Public score shown from the verified overall while the stale axis breakdown refreshesAnalysis summary
LATTICE is a benchmark for evaluating crypto agents' decision support utility in real-world scenarios, using LLM judges for scalable assessment.
Loading BUILD…
Paper Pack
10.48550/arXiv.2604.26235LATTICE is a benchmark for evaluating crypto agents' decision support utility in real-world scenarios, using LLM judges for scalable assessment.
Abstract
We introduce LATTICE, a benchmark for evaluating the decision support utility of crypto agents in realistic user-facing scenarios. Prior crypto agent benchmarks mainly focus on reasoning-based or outcome-based evaluation, but do not assess agents' ability to assist user decision-making. LATTICE addresses this gap by: (1) defining six evaluation dimensions that capture key decision support properties; (2) proposing 16 task types that span the end-to-end crypto copilot workflow; and (3) using LLM judges to automatically score agent outputs based on these dimensions and tasks. Crucially, the dimensions and tasks are designed to be evaluable at scale using LLM judges, without relying on ground truth from expert annotators or external data sources. In lieu of these dependencies, LATTICE's LLM judge rubrics can be continually audited and updated given new dimensions, tasks, criteria, and human feedback, thus promoting reliable and extensible evaluation. While other benchmarks often compare foundation models sharing a generic agent framework, we use LATTICE to assess production-level agents used in actual crypto copilot products, reflecting the importance of orchestration and UI/UX design in determining agent quality. In this paper, we evaluate six real-world crypto copilots on 1,200 diverse queries and report breakdowns across dimensions, tasks, and query categories. Our experiments show that most of the tested copilots achieve comparable aggregate scores, but differ more significantly on dimension-level and task-level performance. This pattern suggests meaningful trade-offs in decision support quality: users with different priorities may be better served by different copilots than the aggregate rankings alone would indicate. To support reproducible research, we open-source all LATTICE code and data used in this paper.
Source availability
PDF linkedThe paper record includes a public PDF URL.
Extraction status
Parse run pending anchorsA parse run id is attached, but no public source anchors are materialized yet.
Proof status
unverified0 refs; 4 sources; 67% coverage.
What was readable
Derived fallback: Estimated from adjacent evidence; not verified from source.
Viability
Time to MVP
Commercial
Export
Preparing verified analysis
Dimensions overall score 7.0
PROBLEM
LATTICE is a benchmark for evaluating crypto agents' decision support utility in real-world scenarios, using LLM judges for scalable assessment. Prior crypto agent benchmarks mainly focus on reasoning-based or outcome-based evaluation, but do not assess agents' ability to assist...
METHOD
We introduce LATTICE, a benchmark for evaluating the decision support utility of crypto agents in realistic user-facing scenarios. Prior crypto agent benchmarks mainly focus on reasoning-based or outcome-based evaluation, but do not assess agents' ability to assist user decision...
RESULT
ScienceToStartup currently rates this 7.0/10 on the public viability pass. We introduce LATTICE, a benchmark for evaluating the decision support utility of crypto agents in realistic user-facing scenarios. A public repository is linked, so build verification can inspect implemen...
WHY NOW
Agents moved forward this cycle; last verified April 2026. Public score 7.0/10. Implementation evidence is present through a linked repository.
Abstract-backed public claims while anchored extraction refreshes.
LATTICE is a benchmark for evaluating crypto agents' decision support utility in real-world scenarios, using LLM judges for scalable assessment. Prior crypto agent benchmarks mainly focus on reasoning-based or outcome-based evaluation, but do not assess agents' ability to assist user decision-making.
Abstract-backed fallback claim; anchored extraction has not materialized a public claim row yet.
partial
We introduce LATTICE, a benchmark for evaluating the decision support utility of crypto agents in realistic user-facing scenarios. Prior crypto agent benchmarks mainly focus on reasoning-based or outcome-based evaluation, but do not assess agents' ability to assist user decision-making.
Abstract-backed fallback claim; anchored extraction has not materialized a public claim row yet.
partial
ScienceToStartup currently rates this 7.0/10 on the public viability pass. We introduce LATTICE, a benchmark for evaluating the decision support utility of crypto agents in realistic user-facing scenarios. A public repository is linked, so build verification can inspect implementation evidence instead of treating the paper as PDF-only.
Abstract-backed fallback claim; anchored extraction has not materialized a public claim row yet.
partial
Agents moved forward this cycle; last verified April 2026. Public score 7.0/10. Implementation evidence is present through a linked repository.
Abstract-backed fallback claim; anchored extraction has not materialized a public claim row yet.
partial
Paper-native neighborhood for concepts, methods, materials, markets, and competitors. Missing lanes stay labeled instead of disappearing behind commercialization gates.
Concepts
Methods
Materials
Markets
Competitors
LATTICE is a benchmark for evaluating crypto agents' decision support utility in real-world scenarios, using LLM judges for scalable assessment.
Segment
Agents
Adoption evidence
Public code linked for build inspection
Commercial read
7.0/10 public viability
Direct
Adjacent
Substitute
Unknown
No indexed public discussion is attached to 2604.26235 yet. That is a visibility signal, not a blank module: the monitor is watching the public channels below.
Hacker News
Not indexed yet
Not indexed yet
Bluesky
Not indexed yet
Preview the source document here, or use the hero PDF action for a new tab.
Reference metadata is not materialized in the public index yet. The source PDF remains the authority; cache refresh is optional.
CITED BY
No citing papers are indexed in the public S2S graph yet. This is an explicit zero-signal state, not a hidden lookup.
Foundation
Commercially relevant
Conflicting
Owned Distribution
Get the weekly shortlist of commercializable papers, benchmark movers, and proof receipts that matter for product execution.
2/3 checks · 67%
Build Passport
Build passport pending - Proof Lab budget No verified cost estimate / $7.00 cap
status
missing
reason
passport_row_missing
proof status
unverified
cost/budget
No verified cost estimate
confidence low
next verification path
Build brief missing until Build Passport data exists.
Source missing: Build Passport payload.
Experiment plan missing until prototype path is available.
No prototype path attached.
Validation checklist missing until required assets, cost, and regulatory flags are verified.
No checklist artifact is attached to the Build Passport payload.
Derived signals show verified:false until source-backed receipts exist.
Evidence coverage
OpportunityKernel evidence_receipt
0 refs / 4 sources / 67% coverage
stale
Verify missing sources before using this as buyer proof. verified:false
Build readiness
BuildPassport EvidenceState
passport absent
stale
Run Proof Lab or inspect typed missing state. verified:false
Artifact maturity
GitHub and Hugging Face maturity payloads
No public artifact surface observed
stale
Open source artifacts or mark the gap as missing. verified:false
Technical feasibility
partial
Current read
Runnable path is not fully verified.
Evidence
No Build Passport payload attached.
Gaps
Next test
Run minimal reproduction from the Build Passport prototype path.
Market urgency
missing
Current read
Buyer urgency is not verified from source.
Evidence
0 references, 4 sources, 67% evidence coverage.
Gaps
Next test
Collect buyer interview, deployment evidence, or cited demand signal.
Buyer clarity
missing
Current read
No budget owner is verified for this paper.
Evidence
Build tab has no CRM, procurement, or operator source.
Gaps
Next test
Map target operator, economic buyer, and procurement trigger.
Defensibility
missing
Current read
Defensibility signals are missing.
Evidence
No defensibility receipt attached.
Gaps
Next test
Refresh defensibility bars with source receipts.
Integration burden
missing
Current read
No public implementation surface observed.
Evidence
No GitHub or Hugging Face payload attached.
Gaps
Next test
Write integration checklist from prototype path and target workflow.
Capital intensity
missing
Current read
No observed cost estimate is verified.
Evidence
Cost passport has no observed_usd value.
Gaps
Next test
Run cost passport or mark the cost field not applicable.
Regulatory load
missing
Current read
No regulatory classification is attached.
Evidence
Build Passport ledger does not include regulatory flags.
Gaps
Next test
Classify regulatory flags before commercialization planning.
No named scientific founder assigned.
Paper authors are not treated as operators without consent.
People
No named person assigned.
Gaps
Next verification path
Prototype owner missing.
Build Passport does not name an implementer.
People
No named person assigned.
Gaps
Next verification path
Operator workflow not sourced.
No buyer or workflow interview attached.
People
No named person assigned.
Gaps
Next verification path
No GTM owner verified.
No CRM or outreach source attached.
People
No named person assigned.
Gaps
Next verification path
Regulatory need unclassified.
No clinical or regulatory source attached.
People
No named person assigned.
Gaps
Next verification path
ARTIFACTS
No public artifacts yet.
DEFENSIBILITY
Defensibility and confidence evidence pending.
WATCHTOWER
No verified watchtower monitor rows yet.
FORESIGHT
No prediction yet — minted on next Foresight batch.
OPPORTUNITYKERNEL CHANGES SINCE LAST VIEW
No verified OpportunityKernel changes since the last view.
COMPETITIVE LANDSCAPE UPDATES
No verified competitive landscape changes yet.
RELATED PAPER UPDATES
No verified related paper changes yet.
SIGNAL CANVAS HISTORY AND DELTAS
No Signal Canvas history deltas yet.
TIMELINE
Save this paper to start tracking momentum - commits, demos, and score changes appear here.
No tracked events yet.
Score trend will appear after multiple data points.
BUZZ
Buzz trend pending.