# Whose Data, Whose Benchmark? A User-Centric Framework for Auditing Evaluation Resources

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.19268 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2610.19268/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 29 of its 43 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 13 Oct 2026.

## Builds on (most cited first, 29 of 29)

- [Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2110.14168/) (2021)
- [Measuring Massive Multitask Language Understanding](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2009.03300/) (2020)
- [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)
- [BoolQ: Exploring the Surprising Difficulty of Natural Yes/No Questions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1905.10044/) (2019)
- [MMLU-Pro: A More Robust and Challenging Multi-Task Language Understanding Benchmark](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.01574/) (2024)
- [Datasheets for Datasets](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1803.09010/) (2018)
- [What Disease does this Patient Have? A Large-scale Open Domain Question Answering Dataset from Medical Exams](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2009.13081/) (2020)
- [Conceptual 12M: Pushing Web-Scale Image-Text Pre-Training To Recognize Long-Tail Visual Concepts](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2102.08981/) (2021)
- [DROP: A Reading Comprehension Benchmark Requiring Discrete Reasoning Over Paragraphs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1903.00161/) (2019)
- [Are NLP Models really able to Solve Simple Math Word Problems?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2103.07191/) (2021)
- [Documenting Large Webtext Corpora: A Case Study on the Colossal Clean Crawled Corpus](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2104.08758/) (2021)
- [Large Language Models Are Not Robust Multiple Choice Selectors](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.03882/) (2023)
- [AI and the Everything in the Whole Wide World Benchmark](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2111.15366/) (2021)
- [WIT: Wikipedia-based Image Text Dataset for Multimodal Multilingual Machine Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2103.01913/) (2021)
- [Data and its (dis)contents: A survey of dataset development and use in machine learning research](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2012.05345/) (2020)
- [RedCaps: web-curated image-text data created by the people, for the people](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2111.11431/) (2021)
- [No Classification without Representation: Assessing Geodiversity Issues in Open Data Sets for the Developing World](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1711.08536/) (2017)
- [Does Object Recognition Work for Everyone?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1906.02659/) (2019)
- [DIALECTBENCH: A NLP Benchmark for Dialects, Varieties, and Closely-Related Languages](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.11009/) (2024)
- [Answer Matching Outperforms Multiple Choice for Language Model Evaluation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.02856/) (2025)
- [ECBD: Evidence-Centered Benchmark Design for NLP](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.08723/) (2024)
- [BenchmarkCards: Standardized Documentation for Large Language Model Benchmarks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.12974/) (2024)
- [KidLM: Advancing Language Models for Children -- Early Insights and Future Directions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.03884/) (2024)
- [Garbage In, Reasoning Out? Why Benchmark Scores are Unreliable and What to Do About It](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.23864/) (2025)
- [OpinioRAG: Towards Generating User-Centric Opinion Highlights from Large-scale Online Reviews](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.00285/) (2025)
- [How Does "English (US)" Become the Default? Triangulating Structural Bias Towards American English Across the LLM Pipeline](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2604.04204/) (2026)
- [Where Do Images Come From? Analyzing Captions to Geographically Profile Datasets](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.09775/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Benchmarks shape how model capabilities are measured and interpreted, yet their scores can obscure whose conventions, contexts, and judgments define successful performance. We introduce a user-centric audit framework that distinguishes users who contribute benchmark content from those whose needs evaluation results are intended to represent. The framework operationalizes seven dimensions across benchmark content, metadata, documentation, and scoring procedures. Across 16 resources, we find that American-centered conventions account for 62.4-94.4% of matched signals in 11 text benchmarks, while geographic visibility in five image-text resources is concentrated and strongly associated with national GDP share (mean Pearson r = 0.780; Spearman p = 0.778). Documentation reveals a systematic source-target gap: all 16 resources operationalize source-user context, but none operationalize target-user context. Paired scoring experiments further show that meaning-preserving answer variants reduce DROP exact-match accuracy from 100.0% to 33.3%, while TruthfulQA exhibits metric-dependent reductions in reference similarity. Our framework and documentation checklist make user assumptions auditable, clarifying what benchmark scores represent and where evaluation claims are supported.