Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This work introduces URBANCONTRASTIVEQA, a benchmark that asks whether tool-augmented language models can make this baseline-relative comparison between NYC, Chicago, and Seattle, and evaluates six instruction-tuned models under five tool-output formats.
Urban decision-support often asks whether activity is unusually high or low for a specific place, not which place has the larger raw count. Twenty pickups in a quiet neighborhood can be more abnormal than 180 at an airport. We introduce URBANCONTRASTIVEQA, a benchmark that asks whether tool-augmented language models can make this baseline-relative comparison. Each item pairs two urban situations from public mobility data in NYC, Chicago, and Seattle, labeled by how far current activity deviates from that place's historical baseline. We evaluate six instruction-tuned models under five tool-output formats. With only raw counts, models often pick the larger number even when it is less abnormal for its zone. Server-computed baseline scores and ordinal labels raise accuracy, but gains vary by model. For heterogeneous urban feeds, tool interfaces need to expose local baselines, not just activity volumes. We release the pair bank, labels, scoring scripts, and data card.
