MMLongBench-Doc-V2 corrects 106 annotations, each published with the page and arithmetic that settle it, and replaces the string metric with a pinned LLM judge asked whether a response means the reference.
Abstract
MMLongBench-Doc is a long-document QA benchmark of 1,082 questions over 135 PDFs. Two properties of it push measured scores away from the quantity they are meant to capture: the reference metric compares extracted answers, so 1,358,000 loses to 1358000; and a non-trivial share of ground-truth annotations are wrong, ambiguous, or incomplete --- concentrated, because of how they were found, in exactly the questions capable systems answer correctly. MMLongBench-Doc-V2 corrects 106 annotations, each published with the page and arithmetic that settle it, and replaces the string metric with a pinned LLM judge asked whether a response means the reference. Ten questions whose document ships under the wrong filename are removed rather than counted wrong, along with one duplicated question, leaving 1,071 questions over 134 documents. The most reusable contribution is a decision procedure for when an empty set key may be widened and when widening would destroy a deliberate negative sample; applied to all 208 rows, it widened 14. V2 scores are not comparable with published V1 numbers. The corrected corpus, the per-entry correction record and the evaluation harness are available at https://github.com/VectifyAI/MMLongBench-Doc-V2.
This work proposes Trident, with two complementary components: Trident-R, a retriever-agnostic LLM reranker that converts each candidate into an LLM-readable semantic record, then performs a single adaptive-K rerank call; and Trident-S, a generation-side module that prompts the VLM under topical, entity, and structural...
Guanchen Wu, Jia-Yuan Ding, Subhabrata Mukherjee et al.· 0 citations
Long-document question-answering experiments show that human-verified TOC hierarchies and contextual relationships improve reasoning, with their combination providing complementary benefits.
Yuefeng Zou, Yichen Lu, Jingxiao Yang et al.· 0 citations
Correctly answering a question grounded in normative documents often depends on information outside any single passage: whether the retrieved document is the version currently in force; whether it applies to the jurisdiction, subject (such as an institution or applicant), and date at issue; and whether each normative c...
Liuyin Wang, Shuai-Peng Jin, Ji-Wei Shi et al.· 0 citations
LlamaExtract Agentic Plus ranks first on all three metrics, with accuracy comparable to coding agents at a fraction of the cost, and is the first to score value accuracy, record completeness at scale, grounding, and measured cost together.
Boyang Zhang, Adrian Lyjak, Elizabeth Stewart et al.· arXiv.org· 1 citation
A semantic correctness taxonomy is introduced that assigns open-ended answers to eight ordered classes, separating verbose-but-correct answers from those contaminated by hallucinated content and CAP (Context-Aware Precision), a reference-based metric that scores question-conditioned statements using bidirectional NLI.
Elitsa Yotkova, Violeta Kastreva, Petar Velkov et al.· 0 citations
Large language models answering questions over multi-page documents are expected to cite the supporting pages, yet supplied citations are sometimes inaccurate, and current evaluations score citations at generation time or against text passages: no existing benchmark evaluates whether a system can verify and correct a p...
Chen Qian, Yi-Meng Wang, Yu Chen 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.