ProfBench: Multi-Domain Rubrics requiring Professional Knowledge to Answer and Judge
read the original abstract
Evaluating progress in large language models (LLMs) is often constrained by the challenge of verifying responses, limiting assessments to tasks like mathematics, programming, and short-form question-answering. However, many real-world applications require evaluating LLMs in processing professional documents, synthesizing information, and generating comprehensive reports in response to user queries. We introduce ProfBench: a set of over 7000 response-criterion pairs as evaluated by human-experts with professional knowledge across Physics PhD, Chemistry PhD, Finance MBA and Consulting MBA. We build robust and affordable LLM-Judges to evaluate ProfBench rubrics, by mitigating self-enhancement bias and reducing the cost of evaluation by 2-3 orders of magnitude, to make it fair and accessible to the broader community. Our findings reveal that ProfBench poses significant challenges even for state-of-the-art LLMs, with top-performing models like GPT-5-high achieving only 65.9% overall performance. Furthermore, we identify notable performance disparities between proprietary and open-weight models and provide insights into the role that extended thinking plays in addressing complex, professional-domain tasks. Data: https://huggingface.co/datasets/nvidia/ProfBench and Code: https://github.com/NVlabs/ProfBench and Leaderboard: https://huggingface.co/spaces/nvidia/ProfBench
This paper has not been read by Pith yet.
Forward citations
Cited by 5 Pith papers
-
SCICONVBENCH: Benchmarking LLMs on Multi-Turn Clarification for Task Formulation in Computational Science
SCICONVBENCH is a new benchmark evaluating LLMs on multi-turn disambiguation and inconsistency resolution for task formulation in computational science, with frontier models reaching only 52.7% success on fluid mechan...
-
Evaluating Deep Research Agents on Expert Consulting Work: A Benchmark with Verifiers, Rubrics, and Cognitive Traps
New benchmark evaluates three frontier deep research agents on 42 SME prompts with verifiers and rubrics, reporting low acceptance rates of 9.5-21.4% and agent-specific failure modes.
-
Visual Preference Optimization with Rubric Rewards
rDPO uses offline-built rubrics to generate on-policy preference data for DPO, raising benchmark scores in visual tasks over outcome-based filtering and style baselines.
-
Reward Hacking in Rubric-Based Reinforcement Learning
Rubric-based RL verifiers can be gamed via partial criterion satisfaction and implicit-to-explicit tricks, yielding proxy gains that do not improve quality under rubric-free judges; stronger verifiers reduce but do no...
-
BankerToolBench: Evaluating AI Agents in End-to-End Investment Banking Workflows
BankerToolBench is a new open benchmark of end-to-end investment banking workflows developed with 502 bankers; even the best tested model (GPT-5.4) fails nearly half the expert rubric criteria and produces zero client...
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.