BIG-Bench Hard
Progress Over Time
Interactive timeline showing model performance evolution on BIG-Bench Hard
BIG-Bench Hard Leaderboard
| Context | Cost | License | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Anthropic | — | — | — | ||
| 1 | Anthropic | — | — | — | ||
| 3 | Google | — | — | — | ||
| 4 | Google | 27B | — | — | ||
| 5 | Anthropic | — | — | — | ||
| 6 | Google | 12B | — | — | ||
| 7 | Google | — | — | — | ||
| 8 | Anthropic | — | — | — | ||
| 9 | Microsoft | 60B | — | — | ||
| 10 | Anthropic | — | — | — | ||
| 11 | Google | 4B | — | — | ||
| 12 | Microsoft | 4B | — | — | ||
| 13 | 8B | — | — | |||
| 13 | 8B | — | — | |||
| 15 | Microsoft | 4B | — | — | ||
| 16 | 7B | — | — | |||
| 17 | 2B | — | — | |||
| 17 | Google | 8B | — | — | ||
| 19 | Google | 8B | — | — | ||
| 19 | 2B | — | — | |||
| 21 | Google | 1B | — | — |
What is BIG-Bench Hard?
BIG-Bench Hard (BBH) is a subset of 23 challenging BIG-Bench tasks selected because prior language model evaluations did not outperform average human-rater performance. The benchmark contains 6,511 evaluation examples testing various forms of multi-step reasoning including arithmetic, logical reasoning (Boolean expressions, logical deduction), geometric reasoning, temporal reasoning, and language understanding. Tasks require capabilities such as causal judgment, object counting, navigation, pattern recognition, and complex problem solving.
BIG-Bench Hard is a text benchmark evaluating models on math, reasoning, and language tasks. LLM Stats tracks 21 models on this benchmark, scored on a 0–1 scale. The current average is 0.7, with the leader at 0.9.
Compare leaders on the best AI for math, best AI for reasoning and best AI for language leaderboards.
Current leaders
Claude 3.5 Sonnet from Anthropic currently leads the BIG-Bench Hard leaderboard with a score of 0.931 across 21 evaluated AI models.
Source paper
- Title
- Challenging BIG-Bench Tasks and Whether Chain-of-Thought Can Solve Them
- Authors
- Mirac Suzgun, Nathan Scales, Nathanael Schärli, Sebastian Gehrmann, and 7 others
- Published
- arXiv
- 2210.09261
Abstract
BIG-Bench (Srivastava et al., 2022) is a diverse evaluation suite that focuses on tasks believed to be beyond the capabilities of current language models. Language models have already made good progress on this benchmark, with the best model in the BIG-Bench paper outperforming average reported human-rater results on 65% of the BIG-Bench tasks via few-shot prompting. But on what tasks do language models fall short of average human-rater performance, and are those tasks actually unsolvable by current language models? In this work, we focus on a suite of 23 challenging BIG-Bench tasks which we call BIG-Bench Hard (BBH). These are the task for which prior language model evaluations did not outperform the average human-rater. We find that applying chain-of-thought (CoT) prompting to BBH tasks enables PaLM to surpass the average human-rater performance on 10 of the 23 tasks, and Codex (code-davinci-002) to surpass the average human-rater performance on 17 of the 23 tasks. Since many tasks in BBH require multi-step reasoning, few-shot prompting without CoT, as done in the BIG-Bench evaluations (Srivastava et al., 2022), substantially underestimates the best performance and capabilities of language models, which is better captured via CoT prompting. As further analysis, we explore the interaction between CoT and model scale on BBH, finding that CoT enables emergent task performance on several BBH tasks with otherwise flat scaling curves.
FAQ
Common questions about the BIG-Bench Hard benchmark and leaderboard.