REVIEW 2 cited by
CIBench: Evaluating Your LLMs with a Code Interpreter Plugin
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
Signed reviews
read the original abstract
While LLM-Based agents, which use external tools to solve complex problems, have made significant progress, benchmarking their ability is challenging, thereby hindering a clear understanding of their limitations. In this paper, we propose an interactive evaluation framework, named CIBench, to comprehensively assess LLMs' ability to utilize code interpreters for data science tasks. Our evaluation framework includes an evaluation dataset and two evaluation modes. The evaluation dataset is constructed using an LLM-human cooperative approach and simulates an authentic workflow by leveraging consecutive and interactive IPython sessions. The two evaluation modes assess LLMs' ability with and without human assistance. We conduct extensive experiments to analyze the ability of 24 LLMs on CIBench and provide valuable insights for future LLMs in code interpreter utilization.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
Running in CIRCLE? A Simple Benchmark for LLM Code Interpreter Security
CIRCLE is a 1,260-prompt benchmark that measures how often commercial LLM code interpreters refuse, execute, or time out on resource-exhaustion tasks, revealing large and inconsistent safety gaps.
-
Exploring Autonomous Agents: A Closer Look at Why They Fail When Completing Tasks
Across 204 runs of three agent frameworks on 34 tasks, only about half are successful, and failures fall into planning, execution, and response-generation categories.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.