PreprintCited by 2Information Retrieval and Search BehaviorWeb Data Mining and AnalysisTopic Modeling

GISA: A Benchmark for General Information-Seeking Assistant

Open access
Zhu, Yutao, Zhang, Xingshuo, Zhang, Maosen, Jin, Jiajie, Zhang, Liancheng, Song, Xiaoshuai, Zhao, Kangzhi, Zeng, Wencong +4 more·2026·arXiv

Abstract

The advancement of large language models (LLMs) has significantly accelerated the development of search agents capable of autonomously gathering information through multi-turn web interactions. Various benchmarks have been proposed to evaluate such agents. However, existing benchmarks often construct queries backward from answers, producing unnatural tasks misaligned with real-world needs. Moreover, these benchmarks tend to focus on either locating specific information or aggregating information from multiple sources, while relying on static answer sets prone to data contamination. To bridge these gaps, we introduce GISA, a benchmark for General Information-Seeking Assistants comprising 373 human-crafted queries that reflect authentic information-seeking scenarios. GISA features four structured answer formats (item, set, list, and table), enabling deterministic evaluation. It integrates both deep reasoning and broad information aggregation within unified tasks, and includes a live subset with periodically updated answers to resist memorization. Notably, GISA provides complete human search trajectories for every query, offering gold-standard references for process-level supervision and imitation learning. Experiments on mainstream LLMs and commercial search products reveal that even the best-performing model achieves only 19.30\% exact match score, with performance notably degrading on tasks requiring complex planning and comprehensive information gathering. These findings highlight substantial room for future improvement.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2602.08543

Cites

0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • GISA spans item-, set-, list-, and table-valued answers and maintains a live subset through periodically updated answers.

    “GISA [Zhu et al., 2026] spans item-, set-, list-, and table-valued answers and maintains a live subset through periodically updated answers.”

    From WANDR: A Benchmark for Wide and Deep Research (2026) · cites this paper as Zhu et al., 2026

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

The publisher hasn’t deposited this paper’s reference list.

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. Grégoire Mialon, Clémentine Fourrier, Thomas Wolf, Yann LeCun, and Thomas Scialom. GAIA: a benchmark for general AI assistants. In The Twelfth International Conference on Learning Representations, ICLR 2024, Vienna, Austria, May 7-11, 2024.
  2. Ruiyang Ren, Yuhao Wang, Junyi Li, Jinhao Jiang, Wayne Xin Zhao, Wenjie Wang, and Tat-Seng Chua. Holistically guided monte carlo tree search for intricate information seeking. CoRR, abs/2502.04751, 2025. doi: 10.48550/ARXIV.2502.04751. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2502.04751. · DOI
  3. Jialong Wu, Wenbiao Yin, Yong Jiang, Zhenglin Wang, Zekun Xi, Runnan Fang, Linhai Zhang, Yulan He, Deyu Zhou, Pengjun Xie, and Fei Huang. Webwalker: Benchmarking llms in web traversal. In Wanxiang Che, Joyce Nabende, Ekaterina Shutova, and Mohammad Taher Pilehvar, editors, Proceedings of the 63rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers), ACL 2025, Vienna, Austria, July 27 -August 1, 2025, pages 10290-10305. Association for Computational Linguistics, 2025. https://aclanthology.org/2025.acl-long.508/.
  4. Shunyu Yao, Jeffrey Zhao, Dian Yu, Nan Du, Izhak Shafran, Karthik R. Narasimhan, and Yuan Cao. React: Synergizing reasoning and acting in language models. In The Eleventh International Conference on Learning Representations, ICLR 2023, Kigali, Rwanda, May 1-5, 2023. OpenReview.net, 2023. https://openreview.net/forum?id=WE_vluYUL-X.
  5. Yangyang Yu, Zhiyuan Yao, Haohang Li, Zhiyang Deng, Yuechen Jiang, Yupeng Cao, Zhi Chen, Jordan W. Suchow, Zhenyu Cui, Rong Liu, Zhaozhuo Xu, Denghui Zhang, Koduvayur Subbalakshmi, Guojun Xiong, Yueru He, Jimin Huang, Dong Li, and Qianqian Xie. Fincon: A synthesized LLM multi-agent system with conceptual verbal reinforcement for enhanced financial decision making. In Amir Globersons, Lester Mackey, Danielle Belgrave, Angela Fan, Ulrich Paquet, Jakub M. Tomczak, and Cheng Zhang, editors, Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 38: Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems 2024, NeurIPS 2024, Vancouver, BC, Canada, December 10 -15, 2024, 2024. http://papers.nips.cc/paper_files/paper/2024/ hash/f7ae4fe91d96f50abc2211f09b6a7e49-Abstract-Conference.html.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Zhu, Y., Zhang, X., Zhang, M., Jin, J., Zhang, L., Song, X., Zhao, K., Zeng, W., Tang, R., Li, H., Wen, J.-R., & Dou, Z.
Affiliations
  • Renmin University of China (CN)
  • Kuaishou (China) (CN)
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2026
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W7128510489
Cited by
0
References
0
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
  • National Natural Science Foundation of China
  • China Postdoctoral Science Foundation
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Information Retrieval and Search Behavior
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Web Data Mining and Analysis
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
Keywords
search agents, benchmark, large language models, information aggregation, deep reasoning, search trajectories, imitation learning

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