<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>ELT-Bench-Verified: Benchmark Quality Issues Underestimate AI Agent Capabilities · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2603.29399/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2603.29399/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>ELT-Bench-Verified: Benchmark Quality Issues Underestimate AI Agent Capabilities — mentioned by cpard</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47912207</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:2603.29399:47912207</guid><pubDate>Sun, 26 Apr 2026 17:43:24 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;Benchmarks/evals are really hard and they become harder when there’s huge incentive to game them at an industry scale. ELT-Bench is another recent example. It was the first serious attempt at a benchmark for data engineering workloads, published about a year ago. A few days ago, a follow-up paper from a group that includes one of the original authors audited the benchmark itself. The team gfound that the benchmark has structural issues that biased results. Here’s the paper: https://arxiv.org/abs/2603.29399 None of these are new though, the industry has gone through all that before just in a…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2603.29399/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>cs.AI</category></item></channel></rss>
