OpenTWBench (Open Taiwan Benchmark): Taiwan-Domain Knowledge Evaluation for Large Language Models, and How the Measurement Apparatus Shapes the Score
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
We present OpenTWBench, an open evaluation suite for Taiwan-domain knowledge in large language models, built around two benchmarks. tw-exam-bench contains 255,854 four-option questions across 148 academic subjects, from fifteen years of Taiwan's national examinations published as open data by the Ministry of Examination; answer keys agree across 31,312 duplicated question groups at 99.91%, with all 27 disagreements accounted for. A reviewed second pass withdrew 2,180 items whose stems depend on a figure the text does not carry; all scores use the remaining 253,674. tw-formosa-bench contains 1,696 difficulty-curated questions about everyday and contemporary Taiwan - the Taiwan that licensing examinations never ask about - generated from a community-curated corpus under a discipline in which no model writes a ground truth, and curated against a frozen seven-model pool so that the pool scored at the passing margin (46.9-74.6%, median ~54%); a leave-one-out experiment shows the selection preserves model ranking (near-zero bias). Within six weeks the frontier had cleared that band: of 108 models now on the public board, 22 score above its ceiling, the best 91.6%. We also document how much of a score comes from the apparatus rather than the model. On identical questions, switching answer extraction from pattern matching to an explicit boxed answer moves accuracy from 20.8% to 93.9%; a single placeholder character in a system prompt moved one model from last (58.2%) to first (83.9%) on the same benchmark; doubling the thinking budget from 8k to 16k tokens bought 0.2% while shuffling which questions failed; and a three-judge validation panel proved to be one judge in disguise, two members approving 92-99% of everything shown. We release all datasets, per-item difficulty data, curation manifests and a leaderboard at https://opentwbench.ai
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 8 of its 12 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 14 Oct 2026.
Builds on
8 of 12 references.
References · 8
- 2020Measuring Massive Multitask Language Understandingcited by 7,963
- 2023Quantifying Language Models' Sensitivity to Spurious Features in Prompt Design or: How I learned to start worrying about prompt formattingcited by 817
- 2023C-Eval: A Multi-Level Multi-Discipline Chinese Evaluation Suite for Foundation Modelscited by 708
- 2023Large Language Models Are Not Robust Multiple Choice Selectorscited by 486
- 2023CMMLU: Measuring massive multitask language understanding in Chinesecited by 449
- 2024Are We Done with MMLU?cited by 194
- 2023Advancing the Evaluation of Traditional Chinese Language Models: Towards a Comprehensive Benchmark Suitecited by 14
- 2024An Improved Traditional Chinese Evaluation Suite for Foundation Modelcited by 13
Built on by
Not cited yet.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2025OmniEduBench: A Comprehensive Chinese Benchmark for Evaluating Large Language Models in Education
- 2024TurtleBench: Evaluating Top Language Models via Real-World Yes/No Puzzles
- 2024metabench -- A Sparse Benchmark of Reasoning and Knowledge in Large Language Models
- 2026OenoBench: A Wine-Domain Benchmark for Knowledge-Grounded Evaluation of Large Language Models
- 2026A Semantic-Sampling Framework for Evaluating Calibration in Open-Ended Question Answering
- 2025Encyclo-K: Evaluating LLMs with Dynamically Composed Knowledge Statements
- 2025ScholarBench: A Bilingual Benchmark for Abstraction, Comprehension, and Reasoning Evaluation in Academic Contexts
- 2023NLPBench: Evaluating Large Language Models on Solving NLP Problems