AI Research Agents Show Promise But Face Critical Shortcomings in Deep Research Bench Report
A new FutureSearch report evaluates AI agents' ability to perform complex research tasks, revealing both strengths and limitations in multi-step reasoning and web-based analysis.
A new report by FutureSearch titled Deep Research Bench (DRB): Evaluating Web Research Agents provides the most comprehensive evaluation to date of AI agents' ability to perform complex research tasks. The study reveals both impressive capabilities and critical shortcomings in how large language models (LLMs) handle multi-step reasoning and web-based analysis.
Benchmarking Real-World Research Skills
The DRB benchmark includes 89 tasks across 8 categories:
- Find Number: e.g. "How many FDA Class II medical device recalls occurred?"
- Validate Claim: e.g. "Is ChatGPT 10x more energy-intensive than Google Search?"
- Compile Dataset: e.g. "Job trends for US software developers from 2019-2023"
To ensure consistency, researchers used RetroSearch - a frozen dataset of scraped web pages that prevents variability from live internet changes. For complex tasks, RetroSearch provided access to over 189,000 archived pages.
Performance Leaders and Limitations
OpenAI's o3 emerged as the top performer with a score of 0.51 (out of a theoretical maximum of 0.8 due to benchmark difficulty). Other notable models included:
- Claude 3.7 Sonnet (Anthropic) - strong in both "thinking" and "non-thinking" modes
- Gemini 2.5 Pro (Google) - excelled at structured planning tasks
- DeepSeek-R1 - surprisingly competitive open-weight model
However, all models showed significant weaknesses:
- Memory failures: Losing track of context during long tasks
- Repetitive loops: Getting stuck in search query cycles
- Premature conclusions: Delivering incomplete answers
- Hallucinations: Inventing plausible but false information
The Tool vs. Memory Debate
The study revealed an interesting finding about "toolless" agents (models relying only on training data without web access):
- Matched tool-enabled agents on simple validation tasks (0.61 vs 0.62)
- Failed completely on complex tasks requiring fresh data synthesis
This highlights that while LLMs can simulate knowledge recall, true research requires real-time information verification.
Implications for Professional Use
The report concludes that while AI agents can outperform average humans on narrow tasks, they still lag behind skilled researchers in:
- Strategic planning
- Mid-process adaptation
- Nuanced reasoning
As noted in the full report, benchmarks like DRB will become increasingly important as LLMs integrate into professional research workflows, helping users understand both the capabilities and limitations of these emerging tools.
Related News
ARC-AGI-3 Benchmark Reveals AI Struggles With Novel Problem Solving
The latest ARC-AGI-3 benchmark tests AI systems on unfamiliar tasks, showing humans still outperform models in basic cognitive challenges.
Key Takeaways from ICML 2025 AI Research Conference
Insights from the International Conference for Machine Learning highlight AI talent wars, reinforcement learning trends, and founder ambitions in the AI field.
About the Author

David Chen
AI Startup Analyst
Senior analyst focusing on AI startup ecosystem with 11 years of venture capital and startup analysis experience. Former member of Sequoia Capital AI investment team, now independent analyst writing AI startup and investment analysis articles for Forbes, Harvard Business Review and other publications.