Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

XL$^2$Bench: A Benchmark for Extremely Long Context Understanding with Long-range Dependencies

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 2404.05446 v1 pith:Q2SRUNXU submitted 2024-04-08 cs.CL

classification cs.CL
keywords contextunderstandingtasksllmslongbenchperformancereading
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
abstract

Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable performance across diverse tasks but are constrained by their small context window sizes. Various efforts have been proposed to expand the context window to accommodate even up to 200K input tokens. Meanwhile, building high-quality benchmarks with much longer text lengths and more demanding tasks to provide comprehensive evaluations is of immense practical interest to facilitate long context understanding research of LLMs. However, prior benchmarks create datasets that ostensibly cater to long-text comprehension by expanding the input of traditional tasks, which falls short to exhibit the unique characteristics of long-text understanding, including long dependency tasks and longer text length compatible with modern LLMs' context window size. In this paper, we introduce a benchmark for extremely long context understanding with long-range dependencies, XL$^2$Bench, which includes three scenarios: Fiction Reading, Paper Reading, and Law Reading, and four tasks of increasing complexity: Memory Retrieval, Detailed Understanding, Overall Understanding, and Open-ended Generation, covering 27 subtasks in English and Chinese. It has an average length of 100K+ words (English) and 200K+ characters (Chinese). Evaluating six leading LLMs on XL$^2$Bench, we find that their performance significantly lags behind human levels. Moreover, the observed decline in performance across both the original and enhanced datasets underscores the efficacy of our approach to mitigating data contamination.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

  1. Respecting Temporal-Causal Consistency: Entity-Event Knowledge Graphs for Retrieval-Augmented Generation

    cs.IR 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A mention-level entity-event knowledge graph for RAG modestly improves temporal-causal question answering on a new narrative benchmark, with gains mostly coming from adding HyDE-style hypothetical answers.

  2. Can AI Validate Science? Benchmarking LLMs for Accurate Scientific Claim $\rightarrow$ Evidence Reasoning

    cs.CL 2025-06 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    CLAIM-BENCH evaluates six LLMs on claim-evidence extraction from 100 AI/ML papers, finding that iterative prompting improves recall at high computational cost.

Pith tools