BenchBench: Benchmarking Automated Benchmark Generation

Fuente: arXiv
Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Zheng, Yandan, Luo, Haoran, Lin, Zhenghong, Liu, Wenjin, Tuan, Luu Anh
Format: Preprint
Published: 2026
Subjects:
Online Access:
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1866911534404337664
author Zheng, Yandan
Luo, Haoran
Lin, Zhenghong
Liu, Wenjin
Tuan, Luu Anh
author_facet Zheng, Yandan
Luo, Haoran
Lin, Zhenghong
Liu, Wenjin
Tuan, Luu Anh
contents Benchmarks are the de facto standard for tracking progress in large language models (LLMs), yet static test sets can rapidly saturate, become vulnerable to contamination, and are costly to refresh. Scalable evaluation of open-ended items often relies on LLM judges, introducing additional sources of bias and prompt sensitivity. We argue that evaluation must extend beyond how well models answer benchmarks to how well models design them. We introduce BenchBench, a three-stage pipeline and dataset for benchmarking automated benchmark generation: (i) extract structured domain cards from seed benchmarks, (ii) prompt multiple designer LLMs to generate quota-controlled suites, and (iii) validate items with a multi-model answerer panel using exact/numeric/symbolic verifiers when possible and rubric-guided judging otherwise, yielding designer--answerer matrices with item-level quality flags and psychometric diagnostics. Across nine variants spanning computer science, mathematics, medicine, and theory-of-mind reasoning (including multilingual and multimodal settings), we generate 16.7K items, retain ~15K core items post-filtering, and produce ~152K graded model--item responses. BenchBench shows that benchmark-design ability is only moderately correlated with answer-time strength (Spearman rho ~0.37), invalidity is negatively associated with discrimination (Pearson r~0.62), and the resulting designer--answerer matrices enable scalable audits of format/modality/language fidelity and suite-dependent self/family interactions. The project is available at: https://github.com/koanatakiyo/BenchBench.
format Preprint
id arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2603_20807
institution arXiv
publishDate 2026
record_format arxiv
spellingShingle BenchBench: Benchmarking Automated Benchmark Generation
Zheng, Yandan
Luo, Haoran
Lin, Zhenghong
Liu, Wenjin
Tuan, Luu Anh
Computation and Language
Benchmarks are the de facto standard for tracking progress in large language models (LLMs), yet static test sets can rapidly saturate, become vulnerable to contamination, and are costly to refresh. Scalable evaluation of open-ended items often relies on LLM judges, introducing additional sources of bias and prompt sensitivity. We argue that evaluation must extend beyond how well models answer benchmarks to how well models design them. We introduce BenchBench, a three-stage pipeline and dataset for benchmarking automated benchmark generation: (i) extract structured domain cards from seed benchmarks, (ii) prompt multiple designer LLMs to generate quota-controlled suites, and (iii) validate items with a multi-model answerer panel using exact/numeric/symbolic verifiers when possible and rubric-guided judging otherwise, yielding designer--answerer matrices with item-level quality flags and psychometric diagnostics. Across nine variants spanning computer science, mathematics, medicine, and theory-of-mind reasoning (including multilingual and multimodal settings), we generate 16.7K items, retain ~15K core items post-filtering, and produce ~152K graded model--item responses. BenchBench shows that benchmark-design ability is only moderately correlated with answer-time strength (Spearman rho ~0.37), invalidity is negatively associated with discrimination (Pearson r~0.62), and the resulting designer--answerer matrices enable scalable audits of format/modality/language fidelity and suite-dependent self/family interactions. The project is available at: https://github.com/koanatakiyo/BenchBench.
title BenchBench: Benchmarking Automated Benchmark Generation
topic Computation and Language
url https://arxiv.org/abs/2603.20807