API-Bank
Progress Over Time
Interactive timeline showing model performance evolution on API-Bank
API-Bank Leaderboard
| Context | Cost | License | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 405B | — | — | |||
| 2 | 70B | — | — | |||
| 3 | 8B | — | — |
What is API-Bank?
A comprehensive benchmark for tool-augmented LLMs that evaluates API planning, retrieval, and calling capabilities. Contains 314 tool-use dialogues with 753 API calls across 73 API tools, designed to assess how effectively LLMs can utilize external tools and overcome obstacles in tool leveraging.
API-Bank is a text benchmark evaluating models on reasoning and tool calling tasks. LLM Stats tracks 3 models on this benchmark, scored on a 0–1 scale. The current average is 0.9, with the leader at 0.9.
Compare leaders on the best AI for reasoning and best AI for tool calling leaderboards.
Current leaders
Llama 3.1 405B Instruct from Meta currently leads the API-Bank leaderboard with a score of 0.920 across 3 evaluated AI models.
Source paper
- Title
- API-Bank: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Tool-Augmented LLMs
- Authors
- Minghao Li, Yingxiu Zhao, Bowen Yu, Feifan Song, and 5 others
- Published
- arXiv
- 2304.08244
Abstract
Recent research has demonstrated that Large Language Models (LLMs) can enhance their capabilities by utilizing external tools. However, three pivotal questions remain unanswered: (1) How effective are current LLMs in utilizing tools? (2) How can we enhance LLMs' ability to utilize tools? (3) What obstacles need to be overcome to leverage tools? To address these questions, we introduce API-Bank, a groundbreaking benchmark, specifically designed for tool-augmented LLMs. For the first question, we develop a runnable evaluation system consisting of 73 API tools. We annotate 314 tool-use dialogues with 753 API calls to assess the existing LLMs' capabilities in planning, retrieving, and calling APIs. For the second question, we construct a comprehensive training set containing 1,888 tool-use dialogues from 2,138 APIs spanning 1,000 distinct domains. Using this dataset, we train Lynx, a tool-augmented LLM initialized from Alpaca. Experimental results demonstrate that GPT-3.5 exhibits improved tool utilization compared to GPT-3, while GPT-4 excels in planning. However, there is still significant potential for further improvement. Moreover, Lynx surpasses Alpaca's tool utilization performance by more than 26 pts and approaches the effectiveness of GPT-3.5. Through error analysis, we highlight the key challenges for future research in this field to answer the third question.
FAQ
Common questions about the API-Bank benchmark and leaderboard.