# ProactBench: Beyond What The User Asked For

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2605.09228 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.09228/

## Key facts

- Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 40 of its 105 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 9 May 2026.

## Builds on (most cited first, 30 of 40)

- [Qwen3 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.09388/) (2025)
- [Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arena](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.05685/) (2023)
- [Measuring Massive Multitask Language Understanding](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2009.03300/) (2020)
- [Qwen2.5 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.15115/) (2024)
- [Lost in the Middle: How Language Models Use Long Contexts](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.03172/) (2023)
- [SWE-bench: Can Language Models Resolve Real-World GitHub Issues?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.06770/) (2023)
- [GPQA: A Graduate-Level Google-Proof Q&A Benchmark](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.12022/) (2023)
- [Emergent Abilities of Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2206.07682/) (2022)
- [LiveCodeBench: Holistic and Contamination Free Evaluation of Large Language Models for Code](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.07974/) (2024)
- [LongBench: A Bilingual, Multitask Benchmark for Long Context Understanding](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.14508/) (2023)
- [Datasheets for Datasets](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1803.09010/) (2018)
- [RULER: What's the Real Context Size of Your Long-Context Language Models?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.06654/) (2024)
- [Instruction-Following Evaluation for Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.07911/) (2023)
- [Chatbot Arena: An Open Platform for Evaluating LLMs by Human Preference](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.04132/) (2024)
- [Large Language Models are not Fair Evaluators](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.17926/) (2023)
- [Towards Understanding Sycophancy in Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.13548/) (2023)
- [Discovering Language Model Behaviors with Model-Written Evaluations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.09251/) (2022)
- [LLM Evaluators Recognize and Favor Their Own Generations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.13076/) (2024)
- [Are Emergent Abilities of Large Language Models a Mirage?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.15004/) (2023)
- [SOTOPIA: Interactive Evaluation for Social Intelligence in Language Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.11667/) (2023)
- [tinyBenchmarks: evaluating LLMs with fewer examples](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.14992/) (2024)
- [WildBench: Benchmarking LLMs with Challenging Tasks from Real Users in the Wild](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.04770/) (2024)
- [Simple synthetic data reduces sycophancy in large language models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.03958/) (2023)
- [Benchmarking Foundation Models with Language-Model-as-an-Examiner](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.04181/) (2023)
- [FANToM: A Benchmark for Stress-testing Machine Theory of Mind in Interactions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.15421/) (2023)
- [Quantifying the Persona Effect in LLM Simulations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.10811/) (2024)
- [Large Language Models are Inconsistent and Biased Evaluators](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.01724/) (2024)
- [STaR-GATE: Teaching Language Models to Ask Clarifying Questions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.19154/) (2024)
- [Eliciting Human Preferences with Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.11589/) (2023)
- [Sensitivity, Performance, Robustness: Deconstructing the Effect of Sociodemographic Prompting](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.07034/) (2023)

## Built on by (most cited first, 4 of 4)

- [Proactive Service Agents: A Unified Decision Framework, Methods, and Evaluation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.03727/) (2026)
- [NeMo Data Designer: An Extensible Framework for Multimodal Synthetic Data Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.17699/) (2026)
- [Asking for What Was Never Requested: Horizontal and Vertical Proactivity in Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.37236/) (2026)
- [Foundations of Proactive Agents: Principles, Technical Layers, and Proactivity-Gym](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.37267/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Most LLM benchmarks score how well a model responds to explicit requests. They leave unmeasured a different conversational ability: noticing and acting on needs the user has implied but not said. We call this conversational proactivity. ProactBench decomposes it into three phase-tied types: textscEmergent, inference from a single disclosed anchor; textscCritical, synthesis across multiple anchors; and textscRecovery, grounded forward-looking value after task completion. We operationalise the benchmark with three agents: a Planner, a User Agent, and an Assistant Model. Their information asymmetries defend against style-confounded scoring, rubric leakage, external-context contamination, and information dumps. The released corpus contains 198 curated dialogues with 624 trigger points across 24 communication styles drawn from a psychometric inventory and audited by an independent LLM judge. Across 16 frontier and open-weight models, textscRecovery is both difficult and weakly predicted by six standard benchmarks, making it a useful new evaluation signal.