Skip to content

RepBench: Compiling Benchmarks into Capability Representations for Large Language Models

Jul 2026 · arXiv.org · Vol abs/2607.28008 · 0 citations · 33 references
Computer Science

TL;DR

Under cross-benchmark transfer evaluation across twelve models completed by all four readouts, difference-in-means attains the highest model-level mean on ten models, while logistic regression wins the most capability-model cells.

Abstract

Representation engineering reads and steers capability directions in large language models, yet methods are typically evaluated on paper-specific synthetic data. The resulting measurements are difficult to compare or reproduce and may reflect surface patterns rather than capabilities. We present RepBench, a benchmark-grounded data layer for capability-aligned representation probing. Crawling 13,427 benchmark papers yields a taxonomy of 182 capability clusters in 13 families; harvesting 353 public benchmark datasets yields 46,149 audited probe texts covering 94 capabilities, each supported by at least two independent benchmarks. This multi-benchmark design reduces dependence on any single source: raw per-text vectors exhibit no natural cluster granularity, whereas benchmark-pooled capability vectors show an interior clustering optimum at a small number of clusters on all 12 evaluated models, with low agreement to the human taxonomy. Under cross-benchmark transfer evaluation across twelve models completed by all four readouts, difference-in-means attains the highest model-level mean on ten models, while logistic regression wins the most capability-model cells. This disagreement shows that the readout method and aggregation criterion are meaningful evaluation dimensions. The pipeline, corpus, and evaluation code are released as a reusable closed-loop workflow.

View source

Similar papers

Preprint Jul 2026

RepBench: Compiling Benchmarks into Capability Representations for Large Language Models

Under cross-benchmark transfer evaluation across twelve models completed by all four readouts, difference-in-means attains the highest model-level mean on ten models, while logistic regression wins the most capability-model cells.

Yanshi Li, Xue Bai, Shuman Liu et al. · 0 citations
Preprint Jul 2026

evalci: A Python Library for Statistically Rigorous Comparison of Language Model Evaluations

Evalci, a pure-Python library that turns a per-item results table into a publication-ready claim, and re-analyzes a public comparison of nine language models'MMLU accuracy to find that 3 of the 8 adjacent leaderboard-rank gaps are not statistically significant after correcting for the 36 pairwise comparisons the ranking implies.

Shreyas Chandrahas · 0 citations
Open access Jul 2026

PROBE: Benchmarking code generation in large language models

The findings show that, while LLMs achieve promising results, they struggle with harder problems and with programming languages that have fewer available resources for training, and they often fail due to fundamental and easily avoidable errors that underscore the unreliability of automatically generated code.

Rodrigo Pato Nogueira, Marco Vieira, João R. Campos · 1 citation
#software testing Preprint Aug 2026

XREPOTEST: Benchmarking Multilingual Repository-Level Unit Test Generation for Large Language Models

XREPOTEST is introduced, a multilingual repository-level benchmark for unit test generation spanning five underexplored languages: Rust, Go, Julia, PHP, and Ruby, and Invocation Rate is proposed to assess whether generated tests meaningfully exercise the intended functionality.

L. Dung, Dong Cao Van, Nam Le Hai et al. · 0 citations
Open access Jul 2026

Empirical benchmarking of large language models for data science coding: a multidimensional evaluation

The LLM4DS-Benchmark is introduced and a multidimensional empirical evaluation of seven large language models is conducted, highlighting the need for multidimensional, task-aware benchmarking and suggesting that model selection for data science coding should be guided by task characteristics and practical constraints rather than aggregate success rate alone.

Santhosh Anitha Boominathan, Sai Sanjna Chintakunta, Everton Guimarães et al. · 0 citations

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.