Sari la conținut

Română · beta. Traducerea a fost făcută automat și este încă în curs de revizuire. Citește pagina în engleză

perspectiva aiqbenchCercetare AI

analiza aiqbench

This paper benchmarks 12 LLMs on Hong Kong fire safety code questions, and it finds a clear gap between multiple-choice performance (80-90% for top proprietary models) and expert-graded open-ended answers (50-70%). The gap matters for anyone considering LLMs for regulatory compliance, since multiple-choice scores can overstate readiness for real-world interpretation. The localized dataset, built with domain experts, is a useful contribution, though results from one jurisdiction and one evaluation setup should be read as a snapshot rather than a general verdict.
Surse care acoperăarXiv, LessWrong
Ce este aceastaLectura unui model asupra articolului și a acoperirii conexe, scrisă pentru aiqbench. Nu sunt cuvintele publicației.

Towards a Benchmark for Fire Safety Code Interpretation in the Hong Kong AEC Industry

arXiv2 min de cititArticolul și perspectiva sunt în engleză.

arXiv:2610.16127v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly explored in the Architecture, Engineering, and Construction (AEC) domain, yet their reliability in regulatory compliance remains uncertain. In this study, we evaluate the performance of LLMs on Hong Kong fire safety codes. In collaboration with domain experts, we create a localized benchmark dataset comprising both multiple-choice questions (MCQs) and open-ended questions (OEQs) to evaluate 12 widely used proprietary and open-source models. Our findings show that top-performing proprietary models achieve 80-90% accuracy on MCQs, whereas open-source models generally lag behind. However, on open-ended evaluation, expert human assessments reveal an accuracy range of only 50-70%, demonstrating that LLMs still have substantial room for improvement in specialized compliance tasks.

Abstract:Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly explored in the Architecture, Engineering, and Construction (AEC) domain, yet their reliability in regulatory compliance remains uncertain. In this study, we evaluate the performance of LLMs on Hong Kong fire safety codes. In collaboration with domain experts, we create a localized benchmark dataset comprising both multiple-choice questions (MCQs) and open-ended questions (OEQs) to evaluate 12 widely used proprietary and open-source models. Our findings show that top-performing proprietary models achieve 80-90% accuracy on MCQs, whereas open-source models generally lag behind. However, on open-ended evaluation, expert human assessments reveal an accuracy range of only 50-70%, demonstrating that LLMs still have substantial room for improvement in specialized compliance tasks.

Computational Engineering, Finance, and Science (cs.CE); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)

arXiv:2610.16127 [cs.CE]

(or arXiv:2610.16127v1 [cs.CE] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.16127 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.

Text integral sub licența deschisă a publicației · 212 cuvinte

Subiecte conexe