This work introduces MetroLLM-Bench, a 955-case benchmark for testing language models as the policy layer of a transit kiosk, and evaluates twenty-six models from six vendors, of which twenty-three are ranked.
Abstract
We introduce MetroLLM-Bench, a 955-case benchmark for testing language models as the policy layer of a transit kiosk. It covers six real metro systems, ranging from 37 to 414 stations, and eleven categories that include routing, fare calculation, disruptions, accessibility, and adversarial input. In each case, the model must call structured tools and submit a machine-renderable terminal state containing an outcome, a per-ticket fare quote when applicable, and a kiosk action. Fourteen deterministic scoring components form Tier 1; eight semantic-quality components form Tier 2, six of which use a language-model judge. We report Tier 1 and the combined score of both tiers. A stratified 75/25 split reserves 717 cases for training-data generation and 238 for held-out evaluation. We evaluate twenty-six models from six vendors, of which twenty-three are ranked. On the held-out partition, a 4B Qwen 3.5 student trained through parameter-efficient fine-tuning (PEFT) exceeds both GPT-5.6 tiers on Tier 1 (91.3 against 90.6 and 90.0) and matches GPT-5.4 full at maximum reasoning effort (91.4), with a 2.6 GB Q4_K_M footprint. Larger 9B and 27B students provide no further Tier 1 improvement over the 4B student at this training scale. Across the four Qwen sizes, the PEFT gain over the corresponding base model decreases from +7.03 points at 2B (three training seeds) to -0.91 at 27B; every seed shows the same direction at every size. A deterministic rule-based baseline reaches 84.6 on Tier 1, with the remaining language-model advantage concentrated in policy adaptation, compound scenarios, accessibility, and temporal reasoning. Muse Glimmer 30B leads the composite ranking, and serving configuration alone moves the Qwen 3.5-to-3.8 comparison by 2.7 Tier 1 points. The benchmark, harness, reproduction guide, and fine-tuned students are released at https://github.com/continker/metrollm-bench.
Jev answers MMLU's calculation-heavy questions more accurately than other MMLU questions (94% vs. 91%), whereas both open models, and all three on C-Eval, find them harder.
Tobias Deußer, L. Sparrenberg, R. Sifa· 9 citations· ⚡1
This work introduces PROOF, a profile-oriented benchmark for factual coverage in instruction-tuned language models, and measures factual coverage as a structured, intervention-aware profile rather than a single claim about what a model believes.
A. Chetvergov, Mikhail Solovev, Timofei Sivoraksha et al.· 0 citations
A structural defense is presented: remove tenant identity from the Model Context Protocol (MCP) tool schema, bind scope to a verified credential, and enforce it below the agent, resulting in a tenant-isolation argument that depends on enforceable interfaces and credentials rather than model compliance.
Mirza Samad Ahmed Baig, Syeda Anshrah Gillani, Asher Ali et al.· 0 citations
This report analyzes Qiushi Engine v0.8 across all 40 test tasks in AstaBench E2E-Bench-Hard, a benchmark that requires autonomous agents to carry a research question through experimental design, code implementation, actual execution, result analysis, and report delivery. Qiushi Engine is model-configurable; this evalu...
Wen-Hao Li, Shu-Xing Yang, Fu-Jia Chen et al.· 0 citations
SemVerBench is introduced, the first benchmark of LLM version-constraint resolution semantics across three ecosystems (npm, PEP 440, Cargo), and six frontier models are evaluated: Opus significantly outperforms all other models, and Sonnet outperforms the OpenAI models (McNemar).
This study empirically evaluates whether cost-efficient Large Language Models (LLMs) can be trusted to generate enterprise code to a written specification. Three models (Gemini Flash 3, GPT-5.4 mini and Claude Haiku 4.5) were asked to solve 992 algorithmic problems as Java Spring Boot service methods conforming to a ma...
Machine-learning networks can learn without detailed instructions from a designer. Those that do may offer insight into how the brain reorganizes itself during learning.
MIT News · Artificial Intelligence· news.mit.eduSep 29, 2026
Professor Sherry Turkle’s new book, “Artificial Intimacy,” offers a withering critique of chatbots and the antisocial dynamics she believes they encourage.