Benchmark Almanac

Adversarial SQuAD

Only in system cards

Models answer SQuAD questions whose passages contain an added distracting sentence.

Llama 3 shows it only in a scatter plot.

In the authors’ words

Standard accuracy metrics indicate that reading comprehension systems are making rapid progress, but the extent to which these systems truly understand language remains unclear. To reward systems with real language understanding abilities, we propose an adversarial evaluation scheme for the Stanford Question Answering Dataset (SQuAD). Our method tests whether systems can answer questions about paragraphs that contain adversarially inserted sentences, which are automatically generated to distract computer systems without changing the correct answer or misleading humans. In this adversarial setting, the accuracy of sixteen published models drops from an average of 75% F1 score to 36%; when the adversary is allowed to add ungrammatical sequences of words, average accuracy on four models decreases further to 7%. We hope our insights will motivate the development of new models that understand language more precisely.

Abstract of Adversarial Examples for Evaluating Reading Comprehension Systems (arXiv:1707.07328, CC0)
Made by Stanford (Jia and Liang) Released Jul 2017 Reading comprehension All tasks public Last in a system card Nov 2024 Last model added Nov 2024
Level
Everyday Most adults, without training
Scored
Checked automatically A program checks the result against an answer key, unit tests or the expected final state.
Answers
Short answer A number, word or short string matched to a key.
3
System cards report it, from 1 lab

No scores here yet

No lab, leaderboard or Epoch AI run has reported a score for Adversarial SQuAD yet.

Labs report it only in system cards

We read the headline results of 479 launch posts from 51 labs, and none of them list this benchmark. Some system cards do, below.

3 system cards report it, from 1 lab

Besides launch posts, we read the system cards, model cards and technical reports labs publish with a release. They report far more, including safety and frontier-risk tests.

DateDocumentScoreAs the document writes itSection
23 Nov 2024 Llama 3.1-8B technical report Adversarial SQuAD, scatter plot with no printed values, pre- and post-trained (Figure 15) Capabilities
23 Nov 2024 Llama 3.1-70B technical report Adversarial SQuAD, scatter plot with no printed values, pre- and post-trained (Figure 15) Capabilities
23 Nov 2024 Llama 3.1-405B technical report Adversarial SQuAD, scatter plot with no printed values, pre- and post-trained (Figure 15) Capabilities

More in Knowledge

All 109 in Knowledge
  • MMLU-Pro In use Harder 10-option version of MMLU with reasoning-focused questions across 14 subjects. Intern-S2-397B 89.8%
  • SuperGPQA In use 26,529 graduate-level multiple-choice questions across 285 disciplines. Accuracy. Qwen 3.6 Max (Preview) 73.9%
  • WideSearch In use 200 bilingual broad info-seeking tasks: agent collects many atomic facts into a table. Scored by success rate and row/item F1. Tencent Hy4 preview 83.9%
  • KMMLU-Pro In use Models answer multiple-choice questions taken from Korean National Professional Licensure exams. It tests professional knowledge used in Korean industry. Solar Pro 4 79.2%
  • BIG-Bench Extra Hard In use Models solve harder replacements for each of the 23 BIG-Bench Hard tasks, 4,520 examples in total. The score is a harmonic mean of task accuracies. Gemma 4 31B IT 74.4%
  • HLE-Verified In use Verified and revised version of Humanity's Last Exam (1,811 items) with uncertain items removed. Seed2.0 Pro 73.6%