metabench -- A Sparse Benchmark of Reasoning and Knowledge in Large Language Models
Open accessAbstract
Large Language Models (LLMs) vary in their abilities on a range of tasks. Initiatives such as the Open LLM Leaderboard aim to quantify these differences with several large benchmarks (sets of test items to which an LLM can respond either correctly or incorrectly). However, high correlations within and between benchmark scores suggest that (1) there exists a small set of common underlying abilities that these benchmarks measure, and (2) items tap into redundant information and the benchmarks may thus be considerably compressed. We use data from n > 5000 LLMs to identify the most informative items of six benchmarks, ARC, GSM8K, HellaSwag, MMLU, TruthfulQA and WinoGrande (with d = 28,632 items in total). From them we distill a sparse benchmark, metabench, that has less than 3% of the original size of all six benchmarks combined. This new sparse benchmark goes beyond point scores by yielding estimators of the underlying benchmark-specific abilities. We show that these estimators (1) can be used to reconstruct each original individual benchmark score with, on average, 1.24% root mean square error (RMSE), (2) reconstruct the original total score with 0.58% RMSE, and (3) have a single underlying common factor whose Spearman correlation with the total score is r = 0.94.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
We forego the ability to use IRT metrics designed for test design, such as Fisher information functions for individual tasks.
“In exchange, we forego the ability to use IRT metrics designed for test design, such as Fisher information functions for individual tasks (used in e.g. Kipnis et al. [47]).”
From Measuring AI Ability to Complete Long Software Tasks (2025) · cites this paper as Kipnis et al. [47]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 66
- Frank B. Baker and Seock-Ho Kim (eds.). Item Response Theory. CRC Press, 0 edition, July 2004. ISBN 978-1-4822-7672-5. doi: 10.1201/9781482276725. · DOI
- Juan Ramón Barrada, Julio Olea, Vicente Ponsoda, and Francisco José Abad. Incorporating random- ness in the fisher information for improving item-exposure control in CATs. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 61(2):493-513, 2008.
- Juan Ramón Barrada, Julio Olea, Vicente Ponsoda, and Francisco José Abad. A method for the comparison of item selection rules in computerized adaptive testing. Applied Psychological Measurement, 34(6):438-452, 2010.
- Allan Birnbaum. Statistical theory for logistic mental test models with a prior distribution of ability. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 6(2):258-276, 1969.
- R. Darrell Bock and Murray Aitkin. Marginal maximum likelihood estimation of item parameters: Application of an EM algorithm. Psychometrika, 46(4):443-459, December 1981. ISSN 0033- 3123, 1860-0980. doi: 10.1007/BF02293801. · DOI · Paper page
- R Darrell Bock and Robert J Mislevy. Adaptive eap estimation of ability in a microcomputer environment. Applied psychological measurement, 6(4):431-444, 1982.
- R. Darrell Bock and Steven Schilling. High-dimensional Full-information Item Factor Analysis. In Maia Berkane (ed.), Latent Variable Modeling and Applications to Causality, Lecture Notes in Statistics, pp. 163-176, New York, NY, 1997. Springer. ISBN 978-1-4612-1842-5. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4612-1842-5_8. · DOI
- Rishi Bommasani, Drew A Hudson, Ehsan Adeli, Russ Altman, Simran Arora, Sydney von Arx, Michael S Bernstein, Jeannette Bohg, Antoine Bosselut, Emma Brunskill, et al. On the opportuni- ties and risks of foundation models. arXiv:2108.07258, 2021. · arXiv
- Tom B. Brown, Benjamin Mann, Nick Ryder, Melanie Subbiah, Jared Kaplan, Prafulla Dhariwal, Arvind Neelakantan, Pranav Shyam, Girish Sastry, Amanda Askell, Sandhini Agarwal, Ariel Herbert-Voss, Gretchen Krueger, Tom Henighan, Rewon Child, Aditya Ramesh, Daniel M. Ziegler, Jeffrey Wu, Clemens Winter, Christopher Hesse, Mark Chen, Eric Sigler, Mateusz Litwin, Scott Gray, Benjamin Chess, Jack Clark, Christopher Berner, Sam McCandlish, Alec Radford, Ilya Sutskever, and Dario Amodei. Language models are few-shot learners. NeurIPS, 2020.
- Sébastien Bubeck, Varun Chandrasekaran, Ronen Eldan, Johannes Gehrke, Eric Horvitz, Ece Kamar, Peter Lee, Yin Tat Lee, Yuanzhi Li, Scott Lundberg, et al. Sparks of artificial general intelligence: Early experiments with gpt-4. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.12712, 2023. · arXiv
- John Burden, Konstantinos Voudouris, Ryan Burnell, Danaja Rutar, Lucy Cheke, and José Hernández- Orallo. Inferring capabilities from task performance with bayesian triangulation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.11975, 2023. · arXiv
- Ryan Burnell, Wout Schellaert, John Burden, Tomer D Ullman, Fernando Martinez-Plumed, Joshua B Tenenbaum, Danaja Rutar, Lucy G Cheke, Jascha Sohl-Dickstein, Melanie Mitchell, et al. Rethink reporting of evaluation results in ai. Science, 380(6641):136-138, 2023.
- Li Cai, Kilchan Choi, Mark Hansen, and Lauren Harrell. Item Response Theory. Annual Review of Statistics and Its Application, 3(1):297-321, June 2016. ISSN 2326-8298, 2326-831X. doi: 10.1146/annurev-statistics-041715-033702. · DOI
- R. Philip Chalmers. mirt: A multidimensional item response theory package for the R environment. Journal of Statistical Software, 48(6):1-29, 2012. doi: 10.18637/jss.v048.i06. · DOI
- Hua-Hua Chang. Psychometrics Behind Computerized Adaptive Testing. Psychometrika, 80(1):1-20, March 2015. ISSN 0033-3123, 1860-0980. doi: 10.1007/s11336-014-9401-5. · DOI
- Mark Chen, Jerry Tworek, Heewoo Jun, Qiming Yuan, Henrique Ponde de Oliveira Pinto, Jared Kaplan, Harri Edwards, Yuri Burda, Nicholas Joseph, Greg Brockman, et al. Evaluating large language models trained on code. arXiv preprint arXiv:2107.03374, 2021a. · arXiv
- Peter Clark, Isaac Cowhey, Oren Etzioni, Tushar Khot, Ashish Sabharwal, Chelsea Schoenick, and Oyvind Tafjord. Think you have solved question answering? try arc, the ai2 reasoning challenge. In Proceedings of the 2018 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP), pp. 4578-4587. Association for Computational Linguistics, 2018.
- Karl Cobbe, Vineet Kosaraju, Mohammad Bavarian, Jacob Hilton, Reiichiro Nakano, Christopher Hesse, and John Schulman. Training verifiers to solve math word problems. arXiv preprint arXiv:2110.14168, 2021. · arXiv
- Julian Coda-Forno, Marcel Binz, Jane X Wang, and Eric Schulz. Cogbench: a large language model walks into a psychology lab. arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.18225, 2024. · arXiv
- Christine DeMars. Item Response Theory. Oxford University Press, April 2010. ISBN 978-0-19- 537703-3. doi: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195377033.001.0001. · DOI
- A. P. Dempster, N. M. Laird, and D. B. Rubin. Maximum Likelihood from Incomplete Data Via the EM Algorithm. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B: Statistical Methodology, 39(1): 1-22, September 1977. ISSN 1369-7412, 1467-9868. doi: 10.1111/j.2517-6161.1977.tb01600.x. · DOI · Paper page
- Katherine Elkins and Jon Chun. Can gpt-3 pass a writer's turing test? Journal of Cultural Analytics, 5(2), 2020.
- Michael Eysenck. Fundamentals of psychology. Psychology Press, 2014.
- Ludwig Fahrmeir, Thomas Kneib, Stefan Lang, and Brian Marx. Regression: Models, Methods and Applications. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2013. ISBN 978-3-642-34332-2 978-3-642-34333-9. doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-34333-9. · DOI
- Ronald K Hambleton and Hariharan Swaminathan. Item response theory: Principles and applications. Springer Science & Business Media, 2013.
- Harry H. Harman and Wayne H. Jones. Factor analysis by minimizing residuals (minres). Psychome- trika, 31(3):351-368, September 1966. ISSN 0033-3123, 1860-0980. doi: 10.1007/BF02289468. · DOI
- Trevor Hastie and Robert Tibshirani. Generalized additive models: some applications. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 82(398):371-386, 1987.
- Dan Hendrycks, Collin Burns, Steven Basart, Andy Zou, Mantas Mazeika, Dawn Song, and Jacob Steinhardt. Measuring massive multitask language understanding. In ICLR, 2021.
- Jen-tse Huang, Wenxuan Wang, Eric John Li, Man Ho Lam, Shujie Ren, Youliang Yuan, Wenxiang Jiao, Zhaopeng Tu, and Michael R Lyu. Who is chatgpt? benchmarking llms' psychological portrayal using psychobench. arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.01386, 2023. · arXiv
- Paul Irwing, Tom Booth, and David J. Hughes (eds.). The Wiley Handbook of Psychometric Testing: A Multidisciplinary Reference on Survey, Scale and Test Development. Wiley, 1 edition, April 2018. ISBN 978-1-118-48983-3 978-1-118-48977-2. doi: 10.1002/9781118489772. · DOI
- Guangyuan Jiang, Manjie Xu, Song-Chun Zhu, Wenjuan Han, Chi Zhang, and Yixin Zhu. Evalu- ating and inducing personality in pre-trained language models. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 36, 2024.
- Pei Ke, Bosi Wen, Zhuoer Feng, Xiao Liu, Xuanyu Lei, Jiale Cheng, Shengyuan Wang, Aohan Zeng, Yuxiao Dong, Hongning Wang, et al. Critiquellm: Scaling llm-as-critic for effective and explainable evaluation of large language model generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.18702, 2023. · arXiv
- Inge Koch. Analysis of Multivariate and High-Dimensional Data. Cambridge Series in Statistical and Probabilistic Mathematics. Cambridge University Press, 2013.
- Kuhn and Max. Building predictive models in r using the caret package. Journal of Statistical Software, 28(5):1-26, 2008. doi: 10.18637/jss.v028.i05. URL https://www.jstatsoft. org/index.php/jss/article/view/v028i05. · DOI
- E.L. Lehmann and George Casella. Theory of Point Estimation. Springer Texts in Statistics. Springer- Verlag, New York, 1998. ISBN 978-0-387-98502-2. doi: 10.1007/b98854. · DOI
- Percy Liang, Rishi Bommasani, Tony Lee, Dimitris Tsipras, Dilara Soylu, Michihiro Yasunaga, Yian Zhang, Deepak Narayanan, Yuhuai Wu, Ananya Kumar, et al. Holistic evaluation of language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2211.09110, 2022. · arXiv
- Stephanie Lin, Jacob Hilton, and Owain Evans. TruthfulQA: Measuring how models mimic human falsehoods. In ACL, 2022.
- Frederic M Lord. Applications of item response theory to practical testing problems. Routledge, 1980.
- D. Magis and G. Raiche. Random generation of response patterns under computerized adaptive testing with the R package catR. Journal of Statistical Software, 48(8), 2012.
- David Magis. A note on the item information function of the four-parameter logistic model. Applied Psychological Measurement, 37(4):304-315, 2013.
- Fernando Martínez-Plumed, Ricardo BC Prudêncio, Adolfo Martínez-Usó, and José Hernández- Orallo. Making sense of item response theory in machine learning. In ECAI 2016, pp. 1140-1148. IOS Press, 2016.
- Fernando Martínez-Plumed, Ricardo B.C. Prudêncio, Adolfo Martínez-Usó, and José Hernández- Orallo. Item response theory in AI: Analysing machine learning classifiers at the instance level. Artificial Intelligence, 271:18-42, June 2019. ISSN 00043702. doi: 10.1016/j.artint.2018.09.004. · DOI
- Yael Moros Daval. Automated Annotation of Meta-Features for Predicting Language Model Perfor- mance in Natural Language Processing Tasks. PhD thesis, Universitat Politècnica de València, 2023.
- Kevin P. Murphy. Probabilistic Machine Learning: An introduction. MIT Press, 2022. URL probml.ai.
- Prathiba Natesan, Ratna Nandakumar, Tom Minka, and Jonathan D. Rubright. Bayesian Prior Choice in IRT Estimation Using MCMC and Variational Bayes. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, September 2016. ISSN 1664-1078. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01422. · DOI
- Keivalya Pandya and Mehfuza Holia. Automating customer service using langchain: Building custom open-source gpt chatbot for organizations. arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.05421, 2023. · arXiv
- Y. Pawitan. In All Likelihood: Statistical Modelling and Inference Using Likelihood. In All Likelihood: Statistical Modelling and Inference Using Likelihood. OUP Oxford, 2013. ISBN 9780199671229. URL https://books.google.de/books?id=8T8fAQAAQBAJ.
- M.D. Reckase. Multidimensional Item Response Theory. Springer New York, New York, NY, 2009. ISBN 978-0-387-89975-6 978-0-387-89976-3. doi: 10.1007/978-0-387-89976-3. · DOI
- Javier Revuelta and Vicente Ponsoda. A comparison of item exposure control methods in computer- ized adaptive testing. Journal of Educational Measurement, 35(4):311-327, 1998.
- Pedro Rodriguez, Joe Barrow, Alexander Miserlis Hoyle, John P. Lalor, Robin Jia, and Jordan Boyd-Graber. Evaluation Examples are not Equally Informative: How should that change NLP Leaderboards? In Proceedings of the 59th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics and the 11th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing (Volume 1: Long Papers), pp. 4486-4503, Online, 2021. Association for Computational Linguistics. doi: 10.18653/v1/2021.acl-long.346. · DOI · Paper page
- Keisuke Sakaguchi, Ronan Le Bras, Chandra Bhagavatula, and Yejin Choi. Winogrande: An adversarial winograd schema challenge at scale. In Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 8732-8740. AAAI, 2020.
- Christof Schuster and Ke-Hai Yuan. Robust estimation of latent ability in item response models. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 36(6):720-735, 2011.
- Daniel O Segall. A sharing item response theory model for computerized adaptive testing. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 29(4):439-460, 2004.
- Dubravka Svetina, Arturo Valdivia, Stephanie Underhill, Shenghai Dai, and Xiaolin Wang. Parameter Recovery in Multidimensional Item Response Theory Models Under Complexity and Nonnormality. Applied Psychological Measurement, 41(7):530-544, October 2017. ISSN 0146-6216, 1552-3497. doi: 10.1177/0146621617707507. · DOI
- David Thissen, Mary Pommerich, Kathleen Billeaud, and Valerie SL Williams. Item response theory for scores on tests including polytomous items with ordered responses. Applied psychological measurement, 19(1):39-49, 1995.
- Vern William Urry. A Monte Carlo investigation of logistic mental test models. PhD thesis, Purdue University, 1970.
- Xuena Wang, Xueting Li, Zi Yin, Yue Wu, and Jia Liu. Emotional intelligence of large language models. Journal of Pacific Rim Psychology, 17:18344909231213958, 2023b.
- Thomas A Warm. Weighted likelihood estimation of ability in item response theory. Psychometrika, 54(3):427-450, 1989.
- William Revelle. psych: Procedures for Psychological, Psychometric, and Personality Research. Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois, 2023. URL https://CRAN.R-project.org/ package=psych. R package version 2.3.9. R. J. Wirth and Michael C. Edwards. Item factor analysis: Current approaches and future directions. Psychological Methods, 12(1):58-79, March 2007. ISSN 1939-1463, 1082-989X. doi: 10.1037/ 1082-989X.12.1. · DOI
- Simon N. Wood. Generalized Additive Models: An Introduction with R. Chapman & Hall/CRC Texts in Statistical Science. CRC Press/Taylor & Francis Group, Boca Raton, second edition edition, 2017. ISBN 978-1-4987-2833-1.
- Cristian Zanon, Claudio S Hutz, Hanwook Yoo, and Ronald K Hambleton. An application of item response theory to psychological test development. Psicologia: Reflexão e Crítica, 29(0):18, 2016.
- Rowan Zellers, Ari Holtzman, Yonatan Bisk, Ali Farhadi, and Yejin Choi. Hellaswag: Can a machine really finish your sentence? In Proceedings of the 57th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL), pp. 4791-4800. Association for Computational Linguistics, 2019.
- Siliang Zhang and Yunxiao Chen. Computation for Latent Variable Model Estimation: A Unified Stochastic Proximal Framework. Psychometrika, 87(4):1473-1502, December 2022. ISSN 0033-3123, 1860-0980. doi: 10.1007/s11336-022-09863-9. · DOI
- Siliang Zhang, Yunxiao Chen, and Yang Liu. An improved stochastic EM algorithm for large-scale full-information item factor analysis. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 73(1):44-71, February 2020. ISSN 0007-1102, 2044-8317. doi: 10.1111/bmsp.12153. · DOI
- Yifan Zhang, Hongyi Sun, Amish Patel, Guangyi Liu, Chenguang Yin, and Zhe Chen. Large language models are human-level prompt engineers. arXiv preprint arXiv:2301.12720, 2023. · arXiv
- Yan Zhuang, Qi Liu, Yuting Ning, Weizhe Huang, Rui Lv, Zhenya Huang, Guanhao Zhao, Zheng Zhang, Qingyang Mao, Shijin Wang, et al. Efficiently measuring the cognitive ability of llms: An adaptive testing perspective. arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.10512, 2023. · arXiv
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Measuring AI Ability to Complete Long Software Tasks
Kwa, T., West, B., Becker, J., Deng, A., Garcia, K., Hasin, M., Jawhar, S., Kinniment, M., Rush, N., Von Arx, S., et al. (2025) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2503.14499 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
Measuring AI Ability to Complete Long Software Tasks
Kwa, T., West, B., Becker, J., Deng, A., Garcia, K., Hasin, M., Jawhar, S., Kinniment, M., Rush, N., Von Arx, S., et al. (2025) · Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 38 · doi:10.52202/085713-3086 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
“In exchange, we forego the ability to use IRT metrics designed for test design, such as Fisher information functions for individual tasks (used in e.g. Kipnis et al. [47]).”
- Authors
- Kipnis, A., Voudouris, K., Buschoff, L. M. S., & Schulz, E.
- Affiliations
- Helmholtz Munich (DE)
- University of Cambridge (GB)
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2024
- ISSN
- 2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 2407.12844
- OpenAlex
- W4406058560
- Cited by
- 1
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Licence
- Locations
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning and Data Classification
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Neural Network Applications
- Keywords
- large language models, benchmark dataset, Hugging Face, root mean square error
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review