pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 1411.1629 · v2 · pith:GLFHFKSGnew · submitted 2014-11-06 · 💻 cs.AI

The Limitations of Standardized Science Tests as Benchmarks for Artificial Intelligence Research: Position Paper

classification 💻 cs.AI
keywords testsstandardizedknowledgesciencetestarguebenchmarksproblems
0
0 comments X
read the original abstract

In this position paper, I argue that standardized tests for elementary science such as SAT or Regents tests are not very good benchmarks for measuring the progress of artificial intelligence systems in understanding basic science. The primary problem is that these tests are designed to test aspects of knowledge and ability that are challenging for people; the aspects that are challenging for AI systems are very different. In particular, standardized tests do not test knowledge that is obvious for people; none of this knowledge can be assumed in AI systems. Individual standardized tests also have specific features that are not necessarily appropriate for an AI benchmark. I analyze the Physics subject SAT in some detail and the New York State Regents Science test more briefly. I also argue that the apparent advantages offered by using standardized tests are mostly either minor or illusory. The one major real advantage is that the significance is easily explained to the public; but I argue that even this is a somewhat mixed blessing. I conclude by arguing that, first, more appropriate collections of exam style problems could be assembled, and second, that there are better kinds of benchmarks than exam-style problems. In an appendix I present a collection of sample exam-style problems that test kinds of knowledge missing from the standardized tests.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Towards Real-World Validity in Generative AI Benchmarks: Understanding and Designing Domain-Centered Evaluations for Journalism Practitioners

    cs.HC 2025-09 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    A human-centered design workshop with journalism practitioners yields an evaluation cookbook and design requirements for contextualized, value-aligned generative AI benchmarks.