SHELF: A Synthetic Harness for Multi-Task Bibliographic Benchmarking
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Libraries and archives manage large collections with limited staff and computing budgets, yet common benchmarks do not systematically test their bibliographic work. They need to know which methods work for their tasks and what those methods require to run. SHELF, the Synthetic Harness for Evaluating LLM Fitness, addresses this gap. It is a Python system that turns labelled taxonomies, writing specifications, and a generation budget into controlled benchmark data and evaluation tasks. This first release contains 62,899 model-written documents based on Library of Congress vocabularies, with tasks for classification, clustering, retrieval, pair classification, and instruction retrieval. We compare TF, TF-IDF, BM25, popular encoders, and, on subject classification only, zero-shot decoders; each method appears only on tasks that support it. Subject classification reaches 0.8887, while genre-form classification reaches only 0.2605, and several pair and clustering tasks remain near chance. Sparse methods remain competitive on classification, while TF-IDF is the fastest measured arm in the subject timing experiment. SHELF also varies bibliographic facets independently and can generate new, verifiably unseen documents after a model's training cutoff. Comparisons with LCSHBench and Project Gutenberg show that model rankings transfer more reliably than absolute scores, but SHELF scores do not estimate accuracy on production catalogue data. We release all source code and data under permissive licenses on GitHub and Hugging Face.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 36 of its 43 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 2 Sep 2026.
Builds on
36 of 43 references.
References · 36
- 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,399
- 2019RoBERTa: A Robustly Optimized BERT Pretraining Approachcited by 13,372
- 2019Sentence-BERT: Sentence Embeddings using Siamese BERT-Networkscited by 9,170
- 2019DistilBERT, a distilled version of BERT: smaller, faster, cheaper and lightercited by 4,307
- 2020MiniLM: Deep Self-Attention Distillation for Task-Agnostic Compression of Pre-Trained Transformerscited by 1,463
- 2025Qwen3 Embedding: Advancing Text Embedding and Reranking Through Foundation Modelscited by 1,261
- 2022Text Embeddings by Weakly-Supervised Contrastive Pre-trainingcited by 1,253
- 2021BEIR: A Heterogenous Benchmark for Zero-shot Evaluation of Information Retrieval Modelscited by 1,252
- 2020MPNet: Masked and Permuted Pre-training for Language Understandingcited by 981
- 2023Towards General Text Embeddings with Multi-stage Contrastive Learningcited by 723
- 2022MTEB: Massive Text Embedding Benchmarkcited by 640
- 2023C-Pack: Packed Resources For General Chinese Embeddingscited by 578
24 more
- 2024Smarter, Better, Faster, Longer: A Modern Bidirectional Encoder for Fast, Memory Efficient, and Long Context Finetuning and Inferencecited by 554
- 2021Large Dual Encoders Are Generalizable Retrieverscited by 456
- 2021AI and the Everything in the Whole Wide World Benchmarkcited by 349
- 2022One Embedder, Any Task: Instruction-Finetuned Text Embeddingscited by 333
- 2023Improving Text Embeddings with Large Language Modelscited by 303
- 2021What Will it Take to Fix Benchmarking in Natural Language Understanding?cited by 203
- 2021When Does Pretraining Help? Assessing Self-Supervised Learning for Law and the CaseHOLD Datasetcited by 201
- 2023Rethinking Benchmark and Contamination for Language Models with Rephrased Samplescited by 195
- 2024A Careful Examination of Large Language Model Performance on Grade School Arithmeticcited by 191
- 2025EmbeddingGemma: Powerful and Lightweight Text Representationscited by 139
- 2025MMTEB: Massive Multilingual Text Embedding Benchmarkcited by 125
- 2025Measuring what Matters: Construct Validity in Large Language Model Benchmarkscited by 119
- 2024FollowIR: Evaluating and Teaching Information Retrieval Models to Follow Instructionscited by 69
- 2023Neural Retrievers are Biased Towards LLM-Generated Contentcited by 38
- 2023NevIR: Negation in Neural Information Retrievalcited by 29
- 2025YourBench: Easy Custom Evaluation Sets for Everyonecited by 20
- 2025FinMTEB: Finance Massive Text Embedding Benchmarkcited by 18
- 2025PhantomWiki: On-Demand Datasets for Reasoning and Retrieval Evaluationcited by 14
- 2025SemEval-2025 Task 5: LLMs4Subjects -- LLM-based Automated Subject Tagging for a National Technical Library's Open-Access Catalogcited by 10
- 2025What Has Been Lost with Synthetic Evaluation?cited by 9
- 2025HUME: Measuring the Human-Model Performance Gap in Text Embedding Taskscited by 7
- 2026The Embedder's Dilemma: LLMs Are Better, but at What Cost?cited by 5
- 2025Grounding Synthetic Data Evaluations of Language Models in Unsupervised Document Corporacited by 2
- 2026LCSHBench: A Multilingual, Consensus-Grounded Benchmark for Library of Congress Subject Heading Assignmentcited by 1
Built on by
Not cited yet.