How to Get Your LLM to Generate Challenging Problems for Evaluation

Arkil Patel, Siva Reddy, Dzmitry Bahdanau

Keywords: Evaluation, Synthetic data, Benchmarking, Question Answering, Code Generation, Math Reasoning

TL;DR: We propose a framework for synthetically generating challenging problems to evaluate LLMs.

Abstract: The pace of evolution of Large Language Models (LLMs) necessitates new approaches for rigorous and comprehensive evaluation. Traditional human annotation is increasingly impracticable due to the complexities and costs involved in generating high-quality, challenging problems, particularly for tasks such as long-context reasoning. Moreover, the rapid saturation of existing human-curated benchmarks by LLMs further necessitates the need to develop scalable and automatically renewable evaluation methodologies. In this work, we introduce **CHASE**, a unified framework to synthetically generate challenging problems using LLMs without human involvement. For a given task, our approach builds a hard problem in a bottom-up manner from simpler components. Moreover since we want to generate synthetic data for evaluation, our framework decomposes the generation process into independently verifiable sub-tasks, thereby ensuring a high level of quality and correctness. We implement CHASE to create evaluation benchmarks across three diverse domains: document-based question answering, repository-level code completion, and math reasoning. The performance of state-of-the-art LLMs on these synthetic benchmarks lies in the range of 40-60\% accuracy, thereby demonstrating the effectiveness of our framework at generating hard problems. Our experiments further reveal that the Gemini models significantly outperform other LLMs at long-context reasoning, and that the performance of all LLMs drastically drops by as much as 70\% when we scale up the context size to 50k tokens.

Primary Area: datasets and benchmarks

Code Of Ethics: I acknowledge that I and all co-authors of this work have read and commit to adhering to the ICLR Code of Ethics.

Submission Guidelines: I certify that this submission complies with the submission instructions as described on https://iclr.cc/Conferences/2025/AuthorGuide.

Anonymous Url: I certify that there is no URL (e.g., github page) that could be used to find authors’ identity.

No Acknowledgement Section: I certify that there is no acknowledgement section in this submission for double blind review.

Submission Number: 12112