# BenchBrowser: Retrieving Evidence for Evaluating Benchmark Validity

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2603.18019 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2603.18019/

## Key facts

- Cited by 1 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 65 of its 91 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 25 Feb 2026.

## Builds on (most cited first, 30 of 65)

- [The Llama 3 Herd of Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.21783/) (2024)
- [Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2110.14168/) (2021)
- [Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Code](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2107.03374/) (2021)
- [Measuring Massive Multitask Language Understanding](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2009.03300/) (2020)
- [Qwen2.5 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.15115/) (2024)
- [Think you have Solved Question Answering? Try ARC, the AI2 Reasoning Challenge](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1803.05457/) (2018)
- [HellaSwag: Can a Machine Really Finish Your Sentence?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1905.07830/) (2019)
- [TruthfulQA: Measuring How Models Mimic Human Falsehoods](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2109.07958/) (2021)
- [TriviaQA: A Large Scale Distantly Supervised Challenge Dataset for Reading Comprehension](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1705.03551/) (2017)
- [Can a Suit of Armor Conduct Electricity? A New Dataset for Open Book Question Answering](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1809.02789/) (2018)
- [Beyond the Imitation Game: Quantifying and extrapolating the capabilities of language models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2206.04615/) (2022)
- [Challenging BIG-Bench Tasks and Whether Chain-of-Thought Can Solve Them](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.09261/) (2022)
- [PubMedQA: A Dataset for Biomedical Research Question Answering](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1909.06146/) (2019)
- [Instruction-Following Evaluation for Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.07911/) (2023)
- [Tulu 3: Pushing Frontiers in Open Language Model Post-Training](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2411.15124/) (2024)
- [Length-Controlled AlpacaEval: A Simple Way to Debias Automatic Evaluators](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.04475/) (2024)
- [Crowdsourcing Multiple Choice Science Questions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1707.06209/) (2017)
- [MathQA: Towards Interpretable Math Word Problem Solving with Operation-Based Formalisms](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1905.13319/) (2019)
- [The WMDP Benchmark: Measuring and Reducing Malicious Use With Unlearning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.03218/) (2024)
- [A Dataset of Information-Seeking Questions and Answers Anchored in Research Papers](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2105.03011/) (2021)
- [The Faiss library](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.08281/) (2024)
- [Query Rewriting for Retrieval-Augmented Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.14283/) (2023)
- [Benchmarking Complex Instruction-Following with Multiple Constraints Composition](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.03978/) (2024)
- [Moral Stories: Situated Reasoning about Norms, Intents, Actions, and their Consequences](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2012.15738/) (2020)
- [InFoBench: Evaluating Instruction Following Ability in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.03601/) (2024)
- [Measuring what Matters: Construct Validity in Large Language Model Benchmarks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2511.04703/) (2025)
- [BetterBench: Assessing AI Benchmarks, Uncovering Issues, and Establishing Best Practices](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2411.12990/) (2024)
- [HEAD-QA: A Healthcare Dataset for Complex Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1906.04701/) (2019)
- [Optimization Methods for Personalizing Large Language Models through Retrieval Augmentation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.05970/) (2024)
- [Clio: Privacy-Preserving Insights into Real-World AI Use](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.13678/) (2024)

## Built on by (most cited first, 1 of 1)

- [ChartBmkAgent: Harness-Governed Multi-Agent Construction of Chart QA Benchmarks from Sparse Error-Taxonomy Specifications](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2610.08106/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Do language model benchmarks actually measure what practitioners intend them to ? High-level metadata is too coarse to convey the granular reality of benchmarks: a "poetry" benchmark may never test for haikus, while "instruction-following" benchmarks will often test for an arbitrary mix of skills. This opacity makes verifying alignment with practitioner goals a laborious process, risking an illusion of competence even when models fail on untested facets of user interests. We introduce BenchBrowser, a retriever that surfaces evaluation items relevant to natural language use cases over 20 benchmark suites. Validated by a human study confirming high retrieval precision, BenchBrowser generates evidence to help practitioners diagnose low content validity (narrow coverage of a capability's facets) and low convergent validity (lack of stable rankings when measuring the same capability). BenchBrowser, thus, helps quantify a critical gap between practitioner intent and what benchmarks actually test.