NTH

Random Is Almost Enough? Stable and Low-Cost Benchmark Compression via BestRand

AuthorsGeorge Ling, Shanshan Zhong, Lijin Yang, Hao Yang, Nanxiang Li, Zhongzhan Huang

AffiliationsBosch Research · Carnegie Mellon University†Correspondence to: hru4sgh@bosch.com

November 6, 2026 2 min read
Watch on YouTube
The one-line take

BestRand aims to make model evaluation cheaper and more reliable by selecting small benchmark subsets that better preserve full-benchmark scores.

Key results

70
Benchmarks evaluated

Text, multimodal, and agent benchmarks in the main evaluation.

16.4%
Mean estimation error reduction

Average improvement over competitive methods.

50.2%
High-error risk reduction

Average reduction versus three strong baselines.

51.3%
Relative construction cost

BestRand’s average cost as a share of comparison methods.

21.8%
OOD estimation error reduction

Average reduction across score-range, model-family, and temporal shifts.

What the paper found

Benchmark compression estimates full evaluation scores from a smaller set of test items, but random subsets can occasionally produce large errors. This paper analyzes that long-tailed error pattern and traces its instability to shared item-level successes and failures across foundation models—a correlation that adding more evaluated models does not eliminate. Its method, BestRand, scores a candidate pool with a few probe models, generates random subsets, then selects the subset whose average probe scores most closely match the pool average. Across 70 text, multimodal, and agent benchmarks, including MMLU, GSM8K, HumanEval, MMMU, MathVista, OSWorld, and tau-bench, BestRand reduced mean absolute estimation error by 16.4% and high-error risk by 50.2% compared with competitive methods, while using 51.3% of their average construction cost. It also lowered out-of-distribution estimation error by 21.8% across score-range, model-family, and temporal shifts. The main takeaway is that random sampling is often accurate, but lightweight probe-guided selection can make it substantially more reliable without the expense of elaborate subset construction.

Original abstract

Benchmark compression reduces the often prohibitive time and cost of model evaluation by evaluating models on a small benchmark subset that closely matches full-benchmark results. To quantify estimation error, we derive an accurate analytical approximation to the error distribution when estimating full-benchmark scores from a subset, showing that most subsets yield small errors, while a few produce much larger errors, resulting in a long-tailed distribution. This means random sampling alone can achieve surprisingly strong performance with high probability, but remains unstable due to rare large errors. We further show that this instability is inherent to modern foundation models and persists even as more models are evaluated. Based on these findings, we introduce BestRand, a stable and low-cost benchmark compression method that preserves the efficiency of random sampling while substantially reducing its high-error tail. We validate BestRand on 70+ text, multimodal, and agent benchmarks, and further extend it to VLA evaluation. Compared with competitive methods, BestRand reduces high-error risk by 50.2% and estimation error by 16.4% on average, while requiring only 51.3% of the construction cost. It further reduces OOD estimation error by 21.8% on average across score-range, model-family, and temporal shifts. Together, our theory provides practical guidance for understanding and predicting the accuracy and reliability of benchmark compression, while BestRand enables stable and accurate compression at low cost. The code and data are publicly available onhttps://github.com/George-Ling3/BestRand.

Read the original paper

More in AI Benchmarks

Browse all 54 papers →
01Benchmark

Measuring AI Agents as Teammates with Collaborative Intelligence

Sean Wu, Aneesh Pappu, Jiaru Zou, Yubin Kim, Yuncong Mao, Hongjian Zhou, Junchi Yu, Jieneng Chen, James Zou

A new benchmark tests whether AI agents can be reliable teammates, revealing that strong individual performance does not guarantee effective collaboration.

Read analysis
03Benchmark

HandsOn: A Large-Scale Simulation Benchmark for Generalizable Dexterous Manipulation

Tianwei Luo, Yiming He, Hongjin Wu, Ting Pan, Debin Ren, Haorui Guo, Junlin Yang, Yuxin Zuo, Zhehao Kou, Kaisen Yang, Zhuoqun Lai, Yi Ding, Jiale Yu, Yuchen Zhang, Zijie Qiu, Haozhan Li, Ning Ding

HandsOn is a large benchmark for testing whether dexterous robots can generalize manipulation skills across hands, objects, and tasks.

Read analysis