ActuBench: A Multi-Agent LLM Pipeline for Generation and Evaluation of Actuarial Reasoning Tasks
On the map: LLM reasoning → Reasoning for agents, planning and code
also in 1 more
Abstract (arXiv)
We present ActuBench, a multi-agent LLM pipeline for the automated generation and evaluation of advanced actuarial assessment items aligned with the International Actuarial Association (IAA) Education Syllabus. The pipeline separates four LLM roles by adapter: one agent drafts items, one constructs distractors, a third independently verifies both stages and drives bounded one-shot repair loops, and a cost-optimized auxiliary agent handles Wikipedia-note summarization and topic labelling. The items, per-model responses and complete leaderboard are published as a browsable web interface at https://actubench.de/en/, allowing readers and practitioners to inspect individual items without a repository checkout. We evaluate 50 language models from eight providers on two complementary benchmarks -- 100 empirically hardest multiple-choice items and 100 open-ended items scored by an LLM judge -- and report three headline findings. First, multi-agent verification is load-bearing: the independent verifier flags a majority of drafted items on first pass, most of which the one-shot repair loop resolves. Second, locally-hosted open-weights inference sits on the cost-performance Pareto front: a Gemma~4 model running on consumer hardware and a Cerebras-hosted 120B open-weights model dominate the near-zero-cost region, with the latter within one item of the top of the leaderboard. Third, MCQ and LLM-as-Judge rankings differ meaningfully: the MCQ scaffold inflates the performance ceiling, and Judge-mode evaluation is needed to discriminate at the frontier.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Reasoning for agents, planning and code, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning. Builds on 16 of its 28 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 22 Apr 2026.
Builds on
16 of 28 references.
References · 16
- 2023Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arenacited by 8,626
- 2021Measuring Mathematical Problem Solving With the MATH Datasetcited by 5,371
- 2023Improving Factuality and Reasoning in Language Models through Multiagent Debatecited by 1,784
- 2023Large Language Models are not Fair Evaluatorscited by 1,085
- 2019DROP: A Reading Comprehension Benchmark Requiring Discrete Reasoning Over Paragraphscited by 903
- 2023A Comprehensive Overview of Large Language Modelscited by 648
- 2023AgentVerse: Facilitating Multi-Agent Collaboration and Exploring Emergent Behaviorscited by 598
- 2023Prometheus: Inducing Fine-grained Evaluation Capability in Language Modelscited by 575
- 2021FinQA: A Dataset of Numerical Reasoning over Financial Datacited by 562
- 2023NLP Evaluation in trouble: On the Need to Measure LLM Data Contamination for each Benchmarkcited by 348
- 2017Learning to Ask: Neural Question Generation for Reading Comprehensioncited by 186
- 2024Benchmark Data Contamination of Large Language Models: A Surveycited by 147
4 more
- 2023Investigating Data Contamination in Modern Benchmarks for Large Language Modelscited by 138
- 2023How Useful are Educational Questions Generated by Large Language Models?cited by 23
- 2022Actuarial Applications of Natural Language Processing Using Transformers: Case Studies for Using Text Features in an Actuarial Contextcited by 6
- 2025Design, Results and Industry Implications of the World's First Insurance Large Language Model Evaluation Benchmarkcited by 2
Built on by
Not cited yet.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2025When AIs Judge AIs: The Rise of Agent-as-a-Judge Evaluation for LLMs
- 2025Leveraging LLMs as Meta-Judges: A Multi-Agent Framework for Evaluating LLM Judgments
- 2026BlueFin: Benchmarking LLM Agents on Financial Spreadsheets
- 2024LegalAgentBench: Evaluating LLM Agents in Legal Domain
- 2026Agent-as-a-Judge
- 2026AgentSim: A Platform for Verifiable Agent-Trace Simulation
- 2023AgentBench: Evaluating LLMs as Agents
- 2026AgentJudgeBench: A Multi-Difficulty Benchmark for Evaluating LLM Judges on Agentic Tool-Calling