The Ouroboros of Benchmarking: Reasoning Evaluation in an Era of Saturation

İbrahim Ethem Deveci, Duygu Ataman

Keywords: LLMs, reasoning, benchmarking, saturation, evaluation

TL;DR: This study analyzes reported performances of OpenAI, Anthropic, and Google models on a total of 52 benchmarks they used, to examine the current state of reasoning benchmarking with a focus on saturation.

Abstract: The rapid rise of Large Language Models (LLMs) and Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) has been accompanied by an equally rapid increase of benchmarks used to assess them. However, due to both improved model competence resulting from scaling and novel training advances as well as likely many of these datasets being included in pre or post training data, results become saturated, driving a continuous need for new and more challenging replacements. In this paper, we discuss whether surpassing a benchmark truly demonstrates reasoning ability or are we simply tracking numbers divorced from the capabilities we claim to measure? We present an investigation focused on three model families, OpenAI, Anthropic, and Google, and how their reasoning capabilities across different benchmarks evolve over the years. We also analyze performance trends over the years across different reasoning tasks and discuss the current situation of benchmarking and remaining challenges. By offering a comprehensive overview of benchmarks and reasoning tasks, our work aims to serve as a first reference to ground future research in reasoning evaluation and model development.

Submission Number: 118