BIG-Bench Extra Hard
read the original abstract
Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in everyday applications, demanding robust general reasoning capabilities and diverse reasoning skillset. However, current LLM reasoning benchmarks predominantly focus on mathematical and coding abilities, leaving a gap in evaluating broader reasoning proficiencies. One particular exception is the BIG-Bench dataset, which has served as a crucial benchmark for evaluating the general reasoning capabilities of LLMs, thanks to its diverse set of challenging tasks that allowed for a comprehensive assessment of general reasoning across various skills within a unified framework. However, recent advances in LLMs have led to saturation on BIG-Bench, and its harder version BIG-Bench Hard (BBH). State-of-the-art models achieve near-perfect scores on many tasks in BBH, thus diminishing its utility. To address this limitation, we introduce BIG-Bench Extra Hard (BBEH), a new benchmark designed to push the boundaries of LLM reasoning evaluation. BBEH replaces each task in BBH with a novel task that probes a similar reasoning capability but exhibits significantly increased difficulty. We evaluate various models on BBEH and observe a (harmonic) average accuracy of 9.8\% for the best general-purpose model and 44.8\% for the best reasoning-specialized model, indicating substantial room for improvement and highlighting the ongoing challenge of achieving robust general reasoning in LLMs. We release BBEH publicly at: https://github.com/google-deepmind/bbeh.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet.
Forward citations
Cited by 13 Pith papers
-
What Drives Interactive Improvement from Feedback?
Controlled student-teacher experiments across four benchmarks show interactive gains are driven more by the student's ability to use feedback than by teacher quality, with self-feedback adding little beyond unguided retries.
-
Hypothesis generation and updating in large language models
LLMs exhibit Bayesian-like hypothesis updating with strong-sampling bias and an evaluation-generation gap but generalize poorly outside observed data.
-
Agentic Frameworks for Reasoning Tasks: An Empirical Study
An empirical evaluation of 22 agentic frameworks on BBH, GSM8K, and ARC benchmarks shows stable performance in 12 frameworks but highlights orchestration failures and weaker mathematical reasoning.
-
InternBootcamp Technical Report: Boosting LLM Reasoning with Verifiable Task Scaling
InternBootcamp supplies 1000+ verifiable, auto-generated task environments across domains that enable task scaling to improve LLM reasoning, producing a 32B model with state-of-the-art results on the new Bootcamp-EVAL...
-
Too long; didn't solve
Longer prompts and solutions in a new expert-authored math dataset correlate with higher failure rates across LLMs, with length linked to empirical difficulty after difficulty adjustment.
-
Learning to Pose Problems: Reasoning-Driven and Solver-Adaptive Data Synthesis
A reasoning-driven problem generator plans synthesis directions with CoT and uses solver performance feedback to adapt difficulty, producing complementary problems that yield a 3.4% average improvement across 10 reaso...
-
Instructions are all you need: Self-supervised Reinforcement Learning for Instruction Following
A label-free self-supervised RL method derives rewards from instructions via constraint decomposition and binary classification, yielding improvements on in-domain and out-of-domain instruction-following tasks.
-
The Serial Scaling Hypothesis
The serial scaling hypothesis formalizes inherently serial problems in complexity theory and demonstrates that diffusion models cannot solve them.
-
Ling and Ring 2.6 Technical Report: Efficient and Instant Agentic Intelligence at Trillion-Parameter Scale
Technical report announcing Ling-2.6 and Ring-2.6 models with hybrid linear attention, evolutionary CoT, and KPop RL for efficient agentic intelligence at scale.
-
Trading Human Curation for Synthetic Augmentation in RLVR
Gated synthetic augmentations can substitute for additional human-authored RLVR tasks at a cost-adjusted trade rate of 1.4x-11.6x while retaining held-out generalization on ten benchmarks spanning code, instruction fo...
-
Position: Stop Evaluating AI with Human Tests, Develop Principled, AI-specific Tests instead
Human tests should not be applied to AI to measure traits like intelligence due to calibration, validity, contamination, and prompt sensitivity issues; develop AI-specific evaluation frameworks instead.
-
From LLM Reasoning to Autonomous AI Agents: A Comprehensive Review
A survey consolidating benchmarks, agent frameworks, real-world applications, and protocols for LLM-based autonomous agents into a proposed taxonomy with recommendations for future research.
-
Bridging Brains and Machines: A Unified Frontier in Neuroscience, Artificial Intelligence, and Neuromorphic Systems
A position and survey paper that identifies convergence between neuroscience, AGI, and neuromorphic computing and outlines four key integration challenges.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.