mlsanityData to 13 Oct 2026

Designing Benchmarks for Knowledge Work

arXiv 2605.23262 ↗First posted 22 May 2026cs.AIcited by 4

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

AI agents are moving quickly from answering isolated questions toward completing work through tools, software environments, and multi-step workflows. Much of what these systems are now asked to do is knowledge work, where information and expertise are interpreted, produced, and communicated as part of completing work. Benchmarks for this setting are usually described only by their tasks, environments, and metrics, leaving four questions implicit: what part of the work is represented, under what conditions it is tested, what work product the system is expected to leave, and what part of that product the benchmark actually evaluates. We introduce a work-centered benchmark representation with four fields: represented activity, tested setting, required work product, and evaluated result. The representation makes these choices explicit and comparable across benchmark designs. To support activity-level reporting across occupations, we derive an aim-dependent inventory of 18 work activities from O*NET task statements and report evidence on semantic coherence, algorithm sensitivity, external ontology legibility in ESCO, and human interpretability. We apply the representation to GDPval, OfficeQA Pro, and APEX-SWE. The case analyses illustrate how occupational deliverables, grounded answers, and executable state changes capture different parts of work within the same representation.

Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 13 Oct 2026). Builds on 15 of its 52 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 22 May 2026.

Builds on

15 of 52 references.

References · 15

  1. 2016SQuAD: 100,000+ Questions for Machine Comprehension of Textcited by 4,133
  2. 2023SWE-bench: Can Language Models Resolve Real-World GitHub Issues?cited by 3,274
  3. 2023A Survey on Large Language Model based Autonomous Agentscited by 2,218
  4. 2021BEIR: A Heterogenous Benchmark for Zero-shot Evaluation of Information Retrieval Modelscited by 1,237
  5. 2016Abstractive Text Summarization Using Sequence-to-Sequence RNNs and Beyondcited by 810
  6. 2022MTEB: Massive Text Embedding Benchmarkcited by 630
  7. 2025BrowseComp: A Simple Yet Challenging Benchmark for Browsing Agentscited by 628
  8. 2024WorkArena: How Capable Are Web Agents at Solving Common Knowledge Work Tasks?cited by 358
  9. 2019Measurement and Fairnesscited by 303
  10. 2023GPTs are GPTs: An Early Look at the Labor Market Impact Potential of Large Language Modelscited by 176
  11. 2025GDPval: Evaluating AI Model Performance on Real-World Economically Valuable Taskscited by 152
  12. 2024Observational Scaling Laws and the Predictability of Language Model Performancecited by 130
3 more
  1. 2025Measuring what Matters: Construct Validity in Large Language Model Benchmarkscited by 112
  2. 2025Which Economic Tasks are Performed with AI? Evidence from Millions of Claude Conversationscited by 93
  3. 2026OfficeQA Pro: An Enterprise Benchmark for End-to-End Grounded Reasoningcited by 38

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 13 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 4.

4 papers.