The benchmark could not load.
NarrativeBench
The Narrative Gap
Can LLMs help us navigate diverse narratives across languages?
The illusion of knowledge and control
Models limit users’ agency to navigate narratives.
Models struggle to follow requests to include, exclude, or recover specific narratives. An answer that appears to follow the request can create an illusion of control. When the answer also looks complete, users may think they have seen all the relevant narratives, creating an illusion of knowledge.
Even with an explicit request for diversity, the strongest model configuration covered only about three quarters of available narratives. Narrative access also varied with query framing and language.
View full results| Measure | Model | Score |
|---|
Foundational capabilities
- Include narrativesPresent the specific narrative the user requests.
- Exclude narrativesCover the other relevant narratives while leaving out the specified narrative.
- Include Missing NarrativesComplete a partial answer in the next turn by adding the narratives it left out.
Higher-level capabilities
- Present diverse narrativesPresent the diverse narratives available in the multilingual articles.
- Preserve coverage under confirmatory queriesMaintain narrative coverage when the query favors a particular narrative.
- Provide comparable access across languagesGive users comparable access to narratives across query and source languages.
Information risks
- Filter bubblesThe system repeatedly surfaces a narrow set of narratives, leaving other relevant narratives out of view.
- Echo chambersRepeated exposure to narratives that reinforce a user’s preferred narrative can make others harder to encounter.Generative Echo Chamber? ↗
- Linguistic disparitiesAccess to relevant narratives varies with the language of the query or the narratives themselves.Faux Polyglot ↗
Explore the benchmark
- Benchmark
- Browse 4,800 evaluated cases across 460 questions and 24 query languages. The five tasks each have recorded answers and scores for 15 model configurations.
- Entire dataset
- Browse all 11,038 released question-language versions across 23 topics, including translations without recorded answers. The release also includes 1,333 news articles in 23 source languages.
Conflict map
Loading globe…
The map is unavailable. Use the topic menu to browse queries.
Drag or use the arrow keys to rotate the globe. Circle pins open topics. Diamond pins list the queries grouped at a topic.Topic
Choose a query
Loading queries…
Model answers
Loading answers…
Evaluation prompt and sources
NarrativeBench
Full results
Compare model performance across the information-seeking capabilities.
Exact scores
Table 1 · All topics · All query languages
- 0–20%
- 20–40%
- 40–60%
- 60–80%
- 80–100%
Loading exact scores…
Colors use the worst score in each column for the current selection. A dash means a metric is unavailable for that selection. What the metrics mean ↓
Task rankings
Loading scores…
How the scores work
- Narrative inclusion
- F1 measures how well the answer cites articles associated with the requested narrative while omitting other narratives.
- Narrative exclusion
- F1 measures whether the answer covers other relevant narratives while omitting the specified one.
- Include Missing Narratives
- Recall measures the share of narratives missing from a partial answer that the model adds in the next turn.
- Present diverse narratives
- Baseline prompt recall and diverse prompt recall measure coverage of available narratives. The diverse prompt explicitly requests narrative diversity.
- Preserve coverage under confirmatory queries
- The absolute recall gap compares neutral queries with queries that favor a particular narrative. A smaller gap means more consistent coverage across framings.
- Provide comparable access across languages
- The query-language score gap compares scores by the language of the question. The target narrative-language score gap compares scores by the publication language of the requested narrative. Both use English as the reference.
Recall is the share of required narratives covered. F1 balances recall with precision, the share of cited narratives that match the task. Displayed ties share a rank.
Language-gated scoring. The scorer checks whether the answer is in the language of the question. Answers identified as different-language or mixed-language receive zero. Answers with an uncertain classification proceed to citation-based scoring. Cited articles can be in any language. The language violations column counts different-language and mixed-language answers.
The unfiltered scores reproduce Table 1 in the paper, including standard errors in parentheses. Filtered cells show point estimates. For a selected non-English query language, the query-language score gap compares its mean score with English within the same topic scope. Framing and target narrative-language gaps require cases in both comparison groups. Score gaps are reported in percentage points.
Source-language omission
Compare how often a response cites no article in an available source language under the Baseline and Diverse prompts. The topic and query-language filters above apply here. This measure uses citations independently of the answer-language check.
All model configurations
Loading source-language results…
Each available publication language counts once per answer. Hover over a bar to see the number of omissions and opportunities. The language order follows the pooled Diverse Prompt rates for the current topic and query language. See Figure 1 in the paper.
Cite NarrativeBench
Loading BibTeX…