aiqbench analysis
This research introduces BSDProbe, a framework that diagnoses benchmark reliability by analyzing sample-level capability boundaries rather than relying solely on aggregate leaderboard scores. The study reveals that measurement stability varies significantly across different task axes and model families, with some benchmarks like GPQA exhibiting higher risks of structural inconsistency. For practitioners, the key takeaway is that optimizing for compact, high-discriminability subsets can drastically improve evaluation efficiency without sacrificing accuracy.
Are Benchmarks Reliable? Toward Structural Diagnosis via Sample-Level Capability Boundaries
arXiv:2609.33196v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Evaluating large language models (LLMs) relies heavily on benchmark scores, yet aggregate metrics can obscure whether benchmark samples reliably support model comparison. We introduce \textbf{BSDProbe}, a sample-level framework for \emph{benchmark structural diagnosis} that estimates capability boundaries from repeated-response trajectories along ordered model axes. BSDProbe summarizes samples by boundary position, boundary width, boundary-signal validity, and order consistency, then aggregates them into benchmark-level structural profiles. Experiments on six benchmarks show that benchmark reliability is axis-conditioned and heterogeneous: GSM8K and MATH exhibit the most stable measurement structures, MMLU and TriviaQA are relatively stable but heterogeneous, while GPQA and PopQA show stronger axis-conditioned risks. These profiles remain consistent across Qwen3, Qwen2.5, and cross-model axes. BSDProbe further selects compact high-value subsets whose model discriminability reaches up to $8.58\times$ that of the full benchmark. These results suggest that reliable benchmark use requires examining sample-level capability boundaries beyond leaderboard scores.
Title:Are Benchmarks Reliable? Toward Structural Diagnosis via Sample-Level Capability Boundaries
Abstract:Evaluating large language models (LLMs) relies heavily on benchmark scores, yet aggregate metrics can obscure whether benchmark samples reliably support model comparison. We introduce \textbf{BSDProbe}, a sample-level framework for \emph{benchmark structural diagnosis} that estimates capability boundaries from repeated-response trajectories along ordered model axes. BSDProbe summarizes samples by boundary position, boundary width, boundary-signal validity, and order consistency, then aggregates them into benchmark-level structural profiles. Experiments on six benchmarks show that benchmark reliability is axis-conditioned and heterogeneous: GSM8K and MATH exhibit the most stable measurement structures, MMLU and TriviaQA are relatively stable but heterogeneous, while GPQA and PopQA show stronger axis-conditioned risks. These profiles remain consistent across Qwen3, Qwen2.5, and cross-model axes. BSDProbe further selects compact high-value subsets whose model discriminability reaches up to $8.58\times$ that of the full benchmark. These results suggest that reliable benchmark use requires examining sample-level capability boundaries beyond leaderboard scores.
Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)
arXiv:2609.33196 [cs.AI]
(or arXiv:2609.33196v1 [cs.AI] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.33196 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Full text under the publisher's open licence · 247 words
Related coverage

News
Quantum Computing Report · Jun 7, 2026

[AINews] not much happened today
Latent Space · Sep 18, 2026
Direct Preference Optimization Beyond Chatbots
Hugging Face · Jun 3, 2026

AI in healthcare: applications and best practices
Databricks · Jul 24, 2026