Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This paper introduces Agora, a novel benchmark designed to evaluate large language models on archive-grounded reasoning tasks using a diverse set of 9,664 authentic workplace documents. By requiring models to navigate and synthesize information from a vast collection while addressing inconsistencies in terminology and context, Agora stresses the importance of agentic exploration over exhaustive scanning. The evaluation of eight models reveals that even the best-performing model achieves only 59.4% accuracy, highlighting the significant challenges that remain in this area of document reasoning.
Even the top-performing language models struggle with archive-grounded reasoning, achieving only 59.4% accuracy on a benchmark designed to test their agentic capabilities across diverse workplace documents.
Large language models are increasingly deployed as agents that reason over documents rather than answer from parametric knowledge. We study archive-grounded reasoning: locating sparse evidence across a large, messy collection of workplace files, reconciling inconsistent terminology, units, and time conventions, and computing an answer. Existing benchmarks address only parts of this setting and none jointly stresses archive-groundedness, agentic exploration, and cross-domain coverage. We introduce Agora, a benchmark pairing 362 questions with eight domain collections of 9,664 authentic documents and 372M tokens, far exceeding any model's context window, so agents must explore deliberately rather than scan exhaustively. Agora is built by an agentic pipeline combining cross-document task synthesis, leakage-preventing obfuscation, and difficulty filtering. Evaluating eight models, we find the task far from solved: even the strongest reaches only 59.4% accuracy, with notable variation across domains.
