Good Papers

CruxBench: A Benchmark of Information Discovery

CruxBench evaluates LLM information discovery via Value of Information for decomposing forecasting problems into key subquestions, finding frontier models barely exceed random baselines.

Lina Piao, Amelia Hui Dai, Nick Merrill, Nadja Flechner, Ezra Karger, Haifeng Xu

Published 2026Sydney Poster Session 4 · Wed, Dec 9, 5:00 PM–8:00 PM local time · Hall 1-4arXiv ↗OpenReview ↗

83%
OverallMust read
?
OverallMust readVote to see the scoreThe exact score shows once you've voted, so every vote is your own call. The first half of each home page shelf shows its scores.
Readers
–

Only vote on papers you've read. Sign in with GitHub to vote.

AI panel13/20reviewers recommend it
lenient 5/5
medium 6/10
strict 2/5
AI panel?Vote to see what the 20 AI reviewers said

Abstract

Benchmarks for large language models (LLMs) typically evaluate the accuracy of answers against fixed reference labels. But a central step in many complex real-world tasks is identifying which questions are worth asking in the first place: decomposing a difficult problem into subquestions -- which we call cruxes -- whose answers provide key steps on the path toward solving the target problem. To evaluate this capability of information discovery, we introduce CruxBench, a benchmark that grades LLM-generated questions by their Value of Information (VOI): how much a model-proposed crux updates beliefs about a target forecasting question. CruxBench enjoys a rare combination of three key properties: it is (1) contamination-resistant by construction, since ground truth is generated by future world events; (2) open-ended, admitting unbounded and complex text-based submissions rather than one correct numeric answer; and (3) grounded, with informativeness measured against quantified changes in real-world beliefs. We evaluate a diverse set of eight models on 293 target forecasting questions and find that VOI correlates highly with independent measures of model capability (r=0.90) and captures cruxes' usefulness for answering target questions. However, information discovery remains challenging even for frontier LLMs, which only narrowly outperform a random-timing baseline.