NeedleBench V2
Models retrieve one or several needles and reason over fictional multi-needle facts in English and Chinese haystacks from 4K to 1M tokens. The overall score is the plain average of three tasks.
V2 replaces the R4C-based reasoning needles with fictional facts, spaces Ancestral Trace needles in powers of 2 and drops the weighted average. Scores are not comparable with V1. The release month follows arXiv v2 (2025-05-09).
In the authors’ words
The capability of large language models to handle long-context information is crucial across various real-world applications. Existing evaluation methods often rely either on real-world long texts, making it difficult to exclude the influence of models' inherent knowledge, or introduce irrelevant filler content to artificially achieve target lengths, reducing assessment effectiveness. To address these limitations, we introduce NeedleBench, a synthetic framework for assessing retrieval and reasoning performance in bilingual long-context tasks with adaptive context lengths. NeedleBench systematically embeds key data points at varying depths to rigorously test model capabilities. Tasks are categorized into two scenarios: information-sparse, featuring minimal relevant details within extensive irrelevant text to simulate simple retrieval tasks; and information-dense (the Ancestral Trace Challenge), where relevant information is continuously distributed throughout the context to simulate complex reasoning tasks. Our experiments reveal that although recent reasoning models like Deepseek-R1 and OpenAI's o3 excel in mathematical reasoning, they struggle with continuous retrieval and reasoning in information-dense scenarios, even at shorter context lengths. We also characterize a phenomenon termed 'under-thinking', where models prematurely conclude reasoning despite available information. NeedleBench thus provides critical insights and targeted tools essential for evaluating and improving LLMs' long-context capabilities. All resources are available at OpenCompass: https://github.com/open-compass/opencompass.
- 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.
No scores here yet
No lab, leaderboard or Epoch AI run has reported a score for NeedleBench V2 yet.
No lab model card reports it yet
We read the headline results of 479 launch posts from 51 labs, and none of them list this benchmark.
Versions
More in Long context
- MRCR v2 In use Multi-round coreference: retrieve the n-th of several similar requests hidden in a long synthetic conversation, up to 1M tokens.
Muse Spark 1.3 98.5%
- LongBench v2 In use 503 multiple-choice questions over 8K-2M-word contexts (QA, dialogue, code repos, structured data). Accuracy. Beam 1.0 66.9%
- GraphWalks In use A graph is given as an edge list in long context. The model answers BFS or parent queries, scored by F1. Claude Fable 5 100%
- OpenAI MRCR v2 In use Models read a long synthetic chat that hides 2, 4 or 8 identical writing requests and must reproduce the response to the i-th one. Scored by mean string match ratio per context bin.
K-EXAONE 2.0 94.4%
- CL-bench In use Model must learn new knowledge from a supplied long context (rules, procedures, data) and solve tasks. Strict LLM-verified rubrics. GPT-5.4 27.9%
- AA-LCR 1.1 In use Models answer 100 questions that need reasoning across sets of real documents of about 100K tokens. An LLM equality checker with a fixed system prompt compares each answer with the key.
Step 5 Preview 88.3%