intelligence-radar/BenchmarkCatalog.md
tegwick d0e6438609 Integrate founding explorations and bootstrap operational radar
Assistant: codex
Assistant-Model: gpt-6-astra
Assistant-Session: 01a09c77-b1a9-7eb3-b501-6cb24b458c97
2026-09-13 22:42:09 +02:00

262 lines
9.7 KiB
Markdown
Raw Permalink Blame History

This file contains ambiguous Unicode characters

This file contains Unicode characters that might be confused with other characters. If you think that this is intentional, you can safely ignore this warning. Use the Escape button to reveal them.

> Imported research draft. Benchmark versions, availability, and source claims require verification before operational use.
# Benchmark Catalog — Initial Canon
**Status:** Draft 0.1
**Snapshot date:** 2026-09-13
## 1. Purpose
The Benchmark Catalog is not a list of scores. It is a registry of **measurement instruments**.
Each benchmark record should describe:
- intended construct;
- task distribution;
- modality;
- interaction style;
- agent/tool environment;
- scoring;
- versions;
- freshness;
- saturation;
- contamination risk;
- reproducibility;
- ecological validity;
- scaffold dependence;
- cost to run;
- public/private test status;
- observed correlations with other benchmarks;
- observed predictive value for Intelligence Radar task outcomes.
## 2. Health dimensions
Suggested 0–1 dimensions:
- `construct_relevance`
- `ecological_validity`
- `measurement_reliability`
- `discriminative_power`
- `freshness`
- `reproducibility`
- `contamination_resistance`
- `execution_profile_similarity`
- `coverage_breadth`
No single health score should replace the components, though a summary can be generated.
## 3. Initial benchmark candidates
### Humanity's Last Exam (HLE)
**Constructs:** broad expert academic knowledge/reasoning, multimodal closed-ended reasoning.
**Strength:** deliberately difficult broad frontier evaluation.
**Risk:** closed-ended academic performance is not equivalent to agentic work; rapid frontier gains can reduce discrimination over time.
**Status:** active/watch for saturation.
Source: Nature, *A benchmark of expert-level academic questions to assess AI capabilities*, published 2026-01-28.
### ARC-AGI-2
**Constructs:** abstraction, novel-rule induction, test-time adaptation, sample-efficient generalization.
**Strength:** novel tasks with minimal prior task-specific knowledge; explicit efficiency orientation.
**Risk:** narrow task formalism; uncertain transfer to many real workloads.
**Status:** active.
Source: ARC Prize official ARC-AGI-2 materials and 2026 competition.
### SWE-bench Verified
**Constructs:** repository-level software issue resolution.
**Environment:** code repository + tests; agent/scaffold heavily matters.
**Strength:** real GitHub issues; executable verification.
**Risk:** benchmark and scaffold familiarity; Python-heavy Verified set; high scores reduce discrimination.
**Status:** active/watch.
Official site states Verified is a human-filtered 500-instance subset.
### SWE-bench Multilingual
**Constructs:** real software engineering across multiple languages.
**Strength:** 300 curated tasks from 42 repositories across 9 languages.
**Risk:** still a specific issue-resolution distribution.
**Status:** active.
### Terminal-Bench
**Constructs:** agent competence on hard terminal tasks.
**Strength:** execution-based tasks in sandboxed terminal environments.
**Risk:** version comparability and agent harness effects must be tracked carefully.
**Status:** active; version must always be recorded.
Artificial Analysis moved its aggregate index to Terminal-Bench v4.0 in September 2026, illustrating rapid benchmark version churn.
### Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL) V4
**Constructs:** tool/function calling and broader agentic tool use.
**Strength:** explicit function/tool-use evaluation, real-world contributed functions, multi-turn and agentic evolution.
**Risk:** native function calling vs prompted emulation are distinct execution conditions.
**Status:** active.
Official leaderboard describes V4 as moving from function calling toward holistic agentic evaluation.
### τ³-bench
**Constructs:** tool-agent-user interaction; knowledge-aware and voice variants.
**Strength:** evaluates coordination with dynamic users/tools rather than isolated single-turn answers.
**Risk:** domain/task versioning materially affects comparability.
**Status:** active.
A July 2026 grading update explicitly made affected pre-1.0.1 and post-1.0.1 results non-comparable.
### OSWorld 2.0
**Constructs:** multimodal computer use in real operating-system environments.
**Strength:** execution in computer environments.
**Risk:** environment configuration, UI drift, and agent harness matter.
**Status:** active.
OSWorld announced version 2.0 in June 2026.
### BrowseComp
**Constructs:** persistent web research/navigation to find difficult information.
**Strength:** tests search persistence and information discovery.
**Risk:** short verifiable answers omit much of real research quality, synthesis, ambiguity handling, and citation practice.
**Status:** active.
The original dataset contains 1,266 difficult browsing questions.
### METR Task-Completion Time Horizon
**Constructs:** autonomy/reliability versus human-expert task duration.
**Strength:** converts heterogeneous software tasks into an interpretable time-horizon measure at fixed success probability.
**Risk:** software-task distribution; estimates above the tested horizon become unreliable.
**Status:** active.
METR's Time Horizon 1.1 page was last updated 2026-05-08 and explicitly warns that measurements above 16 hours are unreliable with the current task suite.
### GDPval / GDPval-AA v2
**Constructs:** economically valuable professional knowledge work across occupations.
**Strength:** realistic work products including documents, spreadsheets, diagrams, and slides.
**Risk:** judge-model sensitivity and agent harness effects; GDPval-AA is an independent evaluation implementation rather than the original benchmark alone.
**Status:** active.
Artificial Analysis' GDPval-AA v2 uses 220 tasks from the larger GDPval dataset, shell/web tools, and pairwise judging.
### AA-Briefcase
**Constructs:** long-horizon agentic knowledge work.
**Strength:** private evaluation set helps contamination resistance.
**Risk:** externally non-reproducible/private; methodology provider dependence.
**Status:** active as independent evidence, not canonical truth.
Included in Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index v4.2+.
### AutomationBench-AA
**Constructs:** agentic business workflow automation.
**Strength:** hundreds of workflows across simulated business applications with a private question set.
**Risk:** implementation-specific; private test set.
**Status:** active as independent evidence.
Added to Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index v4.3 in September 2026.
### SciCode
**Constructs:** scientific reasoning translated into research-level code.
**Strength:** scientist-curated problems from realistic scientific workflows.
**Risk:** specialized scientific-programming distribution.
**Status:** active.
Original benchmark contains research problems across physics, mathematics, materials science, biology, and chemistry.
### MLPerf Inference
**Constructs:** systems-level inference performance and efficiency, not semantic intelligence directly.
**Strength:** standardized hardware/software serving measurement; indispensable for self-hosting economics.
**Risk:** workload benchmark results are not direct task-quality rankings.
**Status:** active.
MLPerf Inference v6.0 added/updated major LLM workloads including GPT-OSS 120B and an interactive DeepSeek-R1 scenario.
## 4. Benchmarks intentionally not treated as timeless
A benchmark can lose selection priority when:
- frontier systems approach ceiling;
- training contamination becomes plausible;
- test cases become widely optimized against;
- scorer errors are discovered;
- benchmark version changes invalidate comparability;
- the benchmark ceases to predict real Intelligence Radar outcomes;
- a more ecologically valid instrument becomes available.
The 2026 Stanford AI Index explicitly reports rapid benchmark saturation and evaluation-quality concerns. That is a design requirement for Intelligence Radar, not background trivia.
## 5. Five-benchmark selection rule
Given task `T`, candidate benchmark `b`, and already-selected set `S`:
```text
base(b,T) =
0.30 relevance_to_task
+ 0.15 ecological_validity
+ 0.12 measurement_reliability
+ 0.12 discriminative_power
+ 0.10 freshness
+ 0.10 execution_profile_similarity
+ 0.06 reproducibility
+ 0.05 contamination_resistance
marginal(b,T,S) =
base(b,T)
- redundancy_penalty(b,S)
- known_bias_penalty(b,T)
```
Select greedily or via constrained optimization until five measurements are chosen.
Then normalize task weights across the five:
`weight_i = positive_relevance_i / Σ positive_relevance`
The system must return:
- raw relevance;
- final weight;
- why selected;
- what it fails to measure;
- independence/redundancy notes;
- benchmark version;
- most recent result date used.
## 6. Capability-to-benchmark examples
| Task characteristic | Strong candidate evidence |
|---|---|
| Repository issue resolution | SWE-bench Verified / Multilingual |
| Terminal/DevOps work | Terminal-Bench |
| Tool/API orchestration | BFCL V4 |
| User+tool interactive workflow | τ³-bench |
| Computer GUI use | OSWorld 2.0 |
| Deep web research | BrowseComp |
| Long autonomous software tasks | METR time horizon |
| Professional deliverables | GDPval-AA v2 / AA-Briefcase |
| Business-app automation | AutomationBench-AA |
| Scientific programming | SciCode |
| Novel abstract induction | ARC-AGI-2 |
| Broad expert knowledge | HLE |
| Self-hosted inference economics | MLPerf Inference |
## 7. Required next catalog work
1. Add machine-readable records for every benchmark.
2. Capture version-specific score semantics.
3. Estimate benchmark correlations from shared model results.
4. Add saturation indicators.
5. Add benchmark-cost estimates.
6. Add contamination/public-test exposure indicators.
7. Record model/scaffold/provider exact configuration for every result.
8. Add predictive validity against the Task → Model Performance Ledger.