REVIEW 1 cited by
DrafterBench: Benchmarking Large Language Models for Tasks Automation in Civil Engineering
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
DrafterBench: Benchmarking Large Language Models for Tasks Automation in Civil Engineering
read the original abstract
Large Language Model (LLM) agents have shown great potential for solving real-world problems and promise to be a solution for tasks automation in industry. However, more benchmarks are needed to systematically evaluate automation agents from an industrial perspective, for example, in Civil Engineering. Therefore, we propose DrafterBench for the comprehensive evaluation of LLM agents in the context of technical drawing revision, a representation task in civil engineering. DrafterBench contains twelve types of tasks summarized from real-world drawing files, with 46 customized functions/tools and 1920 tasks in total. DrafterBench is an open-source benchmark to rigorously test AI agents' proficiency in interpreting intricate and long-context instructions, leveraging prior knowledge, and adapting to dynamic instruction quality via implicit policy awareness. The toolkit comprehensively assesses distinct capabilities in structured data comprehension, function execution, instruction following, and critical reasoning. DrafterBench offers detailed analysis of task accuracy and error statistics, aiming to provide deeper insight into agent capabilities and identify improvement targets for integrating LLMs in engineering applications. Our benchmark is available at https://github.com/Eason-Li-AIS/DrafterBench, with the test set hosted at https://huggingface.co/datasets/Eason666/DrafterBench.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
StructureClaw: Traceable LLM Agents and an Executable Benchmark for Structural Engineering Workflows
StructureClaw shows that evaluating LLM agents on complete, executable artifact chains—not final answers—raises structural-engineering workflow success from 56.8% (generic) to 88.6% (automatic) and pinpoints invalid-i...
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.