MA-Bench: Measuring Operational Planning in Language Models
Abstract
MA-Bench evaluates language models on synthesizing contradictory military planning documents into structured briefs, finding that even top models achieve only 62% of expert rubric requirements with inference and omission errors being common.
How well can a language model turn a large, incomplete and partly contradictory body of documents into a plan when no single correct answer exists? We introduce Mission Analysis (MA)-Bench, built on mission analysis, the first step of military operational planning, in which a staff reads the full situation and states the problem before anyone proposes a solution. Its 10 expert-built scenarios pair synthetic packets of ten to twelve documents with 1,257 expert-written pass/fail requirements, each containing information on their source, question type, and importance level. A reasoning-model judge grades each brief against the requirements without seeing the documents; it grades like a fifth credentialed planner, leaving a four-planner panel's agreement unchanged (Fleiss κ 0.42 to 0.41), and a judge from a second provider reproduces the model ranking (Spearman 0.94). Across twenty frontier and open-weights models the best gets 62% of the rubric items right. Models are strongest on facts stated in the documents (58%) and weakest on judgments that must be inferred (33%), and six failures in ten are omissions rather than errors. MA-Bench grades the determinations, not the prose. We release the packets, rubrics, prompts, scorer and every graded brief with item-level verdicts.
Community
This is an automated message from the Librarian Bot. I found the following papers similar to this paper.
The following papers were recommended by the Semantic Scholar API
- K-Bench: measuring model performance on real scientific agent requests (2026)
- Grading Needs a Rubric, Not Intelligence (2026)
- Self-Designed Evaluators and Warm Memory for Long-Horizon Agents (2026)
- What Proves You Wrong: Benchmarking Language Models on Falsifiable Research Ideation (2026)
- Evaluating LLMs as Agentic Workflow Executors in Real-World Customer Support Skills (2026)
- MetroLLM-Bench: Evaluating Language Models as Transit Kiosk Runtimes (2026)
- AgentHop: A Diagnostic Benchmark for Agentic Multi-Hop Scientific Question Answering (2026)
Please give a thumbs up to this comment if you found it helpful!
If you want recommendations for any Paper on Hugging Face checkout this Space
You can directly ask Librarian Bot for paper recommendations by tagging it in a comment: @librarian-bot recommend
Get this paper in your agent:
hf papers read 2610.19138 Don't have the latest CLI?
curl -LsSf https://hf.co/cli/install.sh | bash Models citing this paper 0
No model linking this paper
Datasets citing this paper 1
Spaces citing this paper 0
No Space linking this paper
Collections including this paper 0
No Collection including this paper