Kitab
Models list books by a given author that meet extra constraints, such as publication dates or title words. Scored by precision and constraint satisfaction.
- Made by
- Microsoft Research
- Released
- October 2023
- Kind
- Long-form factuality
- Level
- Everyday
- Scored
- Checked automatically
- Answers
- Short answer
- Tasks
- All public
- Last in a launch post
- April 2025, dropped before it saturated
- Last model added
- April 2025
In the authors’ words
We study the ability of state-of-the art models to answer constraint satisfaction queries for information retrieval (e.g., 'a list of ice cream shops in San Diego'). In the past, such queries were considered to be tasks that could only be solved via web-search or knowledge bases. More recently, large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated initial emergent abilities in this task. However, many current retrieval benchmarks are either saturated or do not measure constraint satisfaction. Motivated by rising concerns around factual incorrectness and hallucinations of LLMs, we present KITAB, a new dataset for measuring constraint satisfaction abilities of language models. KITAB consists of book-related data across more than 600 authors and 13,000 queries, and also offers an associated dynamic data collection and constraint verification approach for acquiring similar test data for other authors. Our extended experiments on GPT4 and GPT3.5 characterize and decouple common failure modes across dimensions such as information popularity, constraint types, and context availability. Results show that in the absence of context, models exhibit severe limitations as measured by irrelevant information, factual errors, and incompleteness, many of which exacerbate as information popularity decreases. While context availability mitigates irrelevant information, it is not helpful for satisfying constraints, identifying fundamental barriers to constraint satisfaction. We open source our contributions to foster further research on improving constraint satisfaction abilities of future models.
GPT-4 (snapshot unspecified) tops the leaderboard with 31%
Best score per entry from the benchmark's own leaderboard, read on November 12th, 2026. Where a model ran with several settings or harnesses, we keep its best. Names in gray aren't in our model list: fine-tunes, agent systems, products and older models. They don't count toward leaders.
- 1 GPT-4 (snapshot unspecified) WITH-CONTEXT 31%
- 2 GPT-3.5 (snapshot unspecified) WITH-CONTEXT 15%
Source: Official Kitab leaderboard
| # | Entry | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | GPT-4 (snapshot unspecified) | 31% | WITH-CONTEXT | Official leaderboard | |
| 2 | GPT-3.5 (snapshot unspecified) | 15% | WITH-CONTEXT | Official leaderboard |
No launch post has listed it since April 2025
Launch posts from every lab that has listed it, one tick per post. Tall colored ticks include it, and short gray ones leave it out.
| Date | Launch post | Score | As the post writes it |
|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 30, 2025 | Kitab, four settings, no overall score | ||
| Apr 30, 2025 | Kitab, four settings, no overall score |
2 system cards report it, from 1 lab
Besides launch posts, we read the system cards, model cards and technical reports labs publish with a release. They report far more, including safety and frontier-risk tests.
| Date | Document | Score | As the document writes it | Section |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 30, 2025 | | Kitab, 4 cells with no overall: no-context precision 23.2, with-context precision 93.8, no-context recall 4.9, with-context recall 74.8 (Table 2) | Hallucination | |
| Apr 30, 2025 | | Kitab, 4 cells with no overall: no-context precision 27.6, with-context precision 93.6, no-context recall 6.3, with-context recall 75.4 (Table 2) | Hallucination |
More in Factuality
- SimpleVQA In use Models answer 2,025 short factual questions about images across 9 tasks and 9 topics. An LLM judge grades answers against fixed references.
Qwen3.7-Plus 81.7%
- HallusionBench In use Models answer 1,129 yes or no questions about 346 images, built in pairs to expose language hallucination and visual illusion. Scored by accuracy.
Keye-VL-2.0-30B-A3B 73.5%
- SimpleQA Verified In use 1,000 human-verified, de-duplicated short-answer factual questions measuring parametric knowledge.
Gemini 3.1 Pro 77.5%
- Kimi Hallu Bench In use Models answer hard prompts drawn from practical work tasks. Fact-checking agents score the share of claims that are hallucinated. GPT-6 Astra 4.20%
- Internal adversarially-designed factuality evaluations In use Models answer adversarial questions in nine categories such as history, math and code. Scored on agreement with human ideal responses. GPT-6 Luna 7.60%
- AA-Omniscience v1.1 In use Models answer 3,000 knowledge questions in six domains without tools and may abstain. The index adds correct answers and subtracts wrong ones.
Inkling 2 Small 16.1