NeedleBench
Models retrieve and reason over one or several facts inserted at different depths in bilingual long texts of set lengths.
Labs report one score per context length.
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 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.
One system card reports it
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.
| Date | Document | Score | As the document writes it | Section |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 15 Jul 2024 | | NeedleBench by length, no overall: 8k 91.90, 32k 92.01, 128k 73.05 (90.27 with YARN+DCA), 256k 17.13 (85.21 with YARN+DCA) (Table 12) | Capabilities |
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%