Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Benchmarks for Automated Commonsense Reasoning: A Survey

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2302.04752 v2 pith:2GKJHABR submitted 2023-02-09 cs.AI

classification cs.AI
keywords benchmarkscommonsensecommonexistingreasoningsenseabilitiesaspects
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

More than one hundred benchmarks have been developed to test the commonsense knowledge and commonsense reasoning abilities of artificial intelligence (AI) systems. However, these benchmarks are often flawed and many aspects of common sense remain untested. Consequently, we do not currently have any reliable way of measuring to what extent existing AI systems have achieved these abilities. This paper surveys the development and uses of AI commonsense benchmarks. We discuss the nature of common sense; the role of common sense in AI; the goals served by constructing commonsense benchmarks; and desirable features of commonsense benchmarks. We analyze the common flaws in benchmarks, and we argue that it is worthwhile to invest the work needed ensure that benchmark examples are consistently high quality. We survey the various methods of constructing commonsense benchmarks. We enumerate 139 commonsense benchmarks that have been developed: 102 text-based, 18 image-based, 12 video based, and 7 simulated physical environments. We discuss the gaps in the existing benchmarks and aspects of commonsense reasoning that are not addressed in any existing benchmark. We conclude with a number of recommendations for future development of commonsense AI benchmarks.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Measuring the Impact of Early-2025 AI on Experienced Open-Source Developer Productivity

    cs.AI 2025-07 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    In a randomized trial of 246 real open-source tasks, experienced developers took 19% longer when AI tools were allowed, despite forecasting 24% faster completion.

Pith tools