Benchmarks · Knowledge & factuality

FRAMES

also: Factuality, Retrieval, And reasoning MEasurement Set, Fact, Fetch, and Reason

Whether a retrieval-augmented system can answer a genuinely multi-hop question that requires pulling facts from several documents and reasoning across them, not just retrieving one relevant passage.

Google DeepMind & Harvard UniversityReleased 19 September 2024Live

Most retrieval-augmented generation demos are tested on questions answerable from a single passage, which understates how hard real research questions are. Google DeepMind and Harvard researchers published FRAMES in September 2024 — the name stands for Factuality, Retrieval, And reasoning MEasurement Set, though the paper itself carries the title “Fact, Fetch, and Reason” — with 824 questions, each requiring facts drawn from two to 15 separate Wikipedia articles. A typical item asks something like which person shares a first name with one historical figure’s mother and a surname with another’s, forcing a system to chain several lookups together rather than retrieve once and answer.

The paper’s own results illustrated why multi-hop retrieval is the hard part. A naive single-step retrieval pipeline using Gemini 1.5 Pro answered 40.8% of questions correctly; an iterative pipeline that re-planned its search across multiple rounds reached 66%; and an oracle version, handed every necessary article directly with no retrieval required, reached 72.9%. The size of that last gap — more than 25 points even with perfect retrieval — was itself informative: some of the failure sat in the model’s reasoning, not only in finding the right documents.

FRAMES is young enough that it has not built up a long history of leaderboard turnover, but it has been adopted as a standard component in evaluating agentic and RAG-based systems specifically, distinct from benchmarks like SimpleQA that test what a model already knows without looking anything up. Its distinguishing contribution is separating retrieval quality from reasoning quality within a single evaluation, rather than measuring only the combined result.

The set

824 test questions, each requiring information drawn from 2 to 15 Wikipedia articles, labelled by the kind of reasoning needed — multiple constraints, numerical comparison, tabular data, temporal disambiguation or post-processing.

Example

If my future wife has the same first name as the 15th first lady of the United States' mother and her surname is the same as the second assassinated president's mother's maiden name, what is my future wife's name? (Answer: Jane Ballou.)huggingface.co

Where it stands

Young and still actively cited as a standard test for retrieval-augmented generation pipelines specifically, rather than for models answering from memorised knowledge alone.

How the top score changed hands

  1. September 2024Gemini 1.5 Pro (naive single-step retrieval)40.8%A single retrieval pass before reasoning, the paper's baseline.
  2. September 2024Gemini 1.5 Pro (multi-step retrieval)66%An iterative pipeline that re-plans its search across several rounds, the paper's proposed method — more than 50% better than the single-step baseline.
  3. September 2024Gemini 1.5 Pro (oracle documents)72.9%Upper bound when every necessary Wikipedia article is supplied directly, showing most of the remaining gap is retrieval, not reasoning.

In the timeline · 11 entries

More knowledge & factuality benchmarks