Spreadsheet Benchmarks

We introduce the workbook time machine, a pipeline that automatically creates benchmarks evaluating the ability of language models to create derived objects in spreadsheets (formulas, charts, pivot tables, and conditional formatting). Applied to public workbook corpora, it produces wtmcorpus--a collection of (input workbook, output workbook, query) triples spanning four artifact types and varying complexity. From this corpus we curate wtmbench, a 150-task evaluation benchmark with queries at three levels of specificity. We evaluate existing spreadsheet manipulation agents and baselines on wtmbench across artifact types, step complexity, and instruction granularity. Our evaluations show that query specificity, agent orchestration, and interface API used to control spreadsheets play a big role in LLM performance on Excel tasks.

Plan Modes have become standard features in agentic programming tools, allowing users to gain transparency and control by working with the agent to develop a plan before task execution. However, it remains unclear whether the benefits of this feature translate to end-user programming environments such as spreadsheets. Since spreadsheet programmers tend to work iteratively and care less about technical correctness, upfront planning may not fit into their workflows as easily. In this paper, we build a prototype of a Plan Mode for spreadsheet programming and evaluate it against a non-planning baseline through a within-subjects user study (N=24). We found that despite similar task outcomes with both tools, using Plan Mode led to a reduction in refinement and a better perception of the tool across dimensions of creativity support and human-machine collaboration. We discuss the implications of these results for the future design of Plan Modes, and for the broader role of human-AI planning in end-user programming.

Real-world document tasks often ask professionals to answer questions from annual reports, regulations, clinical guidelines, and technical manuals that span hundreds or thousands of pages. Some questions also require comparing related reports. Reliable long-document understanding is therefore a prerequisite for using LLMs in compliance, clinical, financial, and engineering workflows, where decisions must be traceable to specific evidence pages and the cost of an unsupported answer is high -- yet most existing benchmarks still measure short-context or single-page QA. We introduce XL-DocBench, a fully human-verified benchmark for extra-long document understanding, with 1,519 retained questions from six professional domains and contexts up to 2,303 pages. XL-DocBench goes beyond page-level lookup. 1,103 examples (72.6%) use multiple evidence pages. The final set also includes 556 questions (36.6%) that use tables, charts, or figures, and 165 questions (10.9%) that require evidence from multiple documents. Each question has one of twelve reasoning labels, expert-annotated evidence pages, a typed verification rule, and an answer format, including 218 None-answer cases. We build the benchmark with a tree-guided synthesis pipeline followed by artifact filters and full verification by 194 human experts. By coupling extra-long professional contexts with page-level evidence and typed rules, XL-DocBench fills a gap left by prior single-page, short multi-page, or text-only long-context benchmarks, and lets future work attribute system failures to retrieval, evidence use, or rule following rather than to a single leaderboard score. The results show that current systems still struggle with long contexts, multi-page evidence, and structured reasoning over professional documents.

We describe our entry to the ICIP 2026 Grand Challenge on Extreme In-the-Wild License Plate Super-Resolution (XLPSR), which scored 9.73 wECR on the public validation leaderboard. The system pairs a Hybrid Attention Transformer super-resolution (HAT) front-end with an ensemble of two scene-text recognisers (PARSeq-S and CLIP4STR-B) and a confidence-weighted character-voting scheme that abstains on uncertain positions. We treat XLPSR as a recognition task gated by image legibility: the SR step exists to lift characters out of sub-pixel territory, and the asymmetric scoring rule (+2 / -1 / 0) is exploited explicitly through abstention. Our pipeline runs in 1.7 s per sequence on RTX 3090 (max 2.7 s, p99 2.4 s), well under the 60 s/sequence Docker budget.

Spreadsheets are widely used for business analysis, financial modeling, reporting, and decision-making. However, most existing spreadsheet benchmarks evaluate isolated operations such as single-formula generation or local cell edits, and therefore fail to capture end-to-end workflows in realistic business settings. We introduce \textsc{SpreadsheetBench 2}, a workflow-level benchmark for spreadsheet agents that covers three task categories: generation, debugging, and visualization. The benchmark is constructed from authentic business data, including financial reports and corporate filings, and is annotated and validated by domain experts. The benchmark contains 321 tasks; each instance averages 11.8 worksheets and requires 593.5 cell modifications, reflecting large multi-sheet workbooks with cross-sheet dependencies. We evaluate eight frontier large language models under a unified multi-turn agent scaffold, and additionally include several LLM-based spreadsheet products as complementary baselines. Results show that current systems remain far from reliable on real-world workflows: the best model achieves 34.89% overall task accuracy, and debugging accuracy is as low as 12.00%. Trajectory analysis and a failure taxonomy further indicate that insufficient spreadsheet inspection and incorrect target-cell selection are the dominant bottlenecks. Together, these findings position \textsc{SpreadsheetBench 2} as a challenging testbed for advancing reliable spreadsheet automation. Project page: https://spreadsheetbench.github.io/

LLM agents increasingly operate in large tool ecosystems, where real-world tasks require discovering relevant tools, inferring implicit sub-goals, and adapting to dynamic environments over long horizons. However, existing benchmarks rarely evaluate planning under retrieval-limited tool visibility. To address this gap, we introduce PlanBench-XL, an interactive benchmark of 327 retail tasks over 1,665 tools that tests whether agents can iteratively retrieve usable tools, invoke them to uncover intermediate evidence for subsequent calls toward the final goal. PlanBench-XL further features an optional blocking mechanism that simulates real-world unpredictability through missing, failing, or distracting tool functions, forcing agents to detect disrupted paths and adapt at runtime. Experiments on ten leading LLMs show that massive-tool planning remains challenging: while GPT-5.4 achieves 51.90% accuracy in block-free settings, it collapses to 11.36% under the most severe blocking condition. Further analysis shows that agents are especially vulnerable when failures lack explicit error signals or when recovery requires longer alternative tool-use paths. These results establish PlanBench-XL as a testbed for diagnosing agentic planning failures and highlight the need for robust adaptive planning in long-horizon tasks with large, imperfect tool environments.

From financial filings to clinical records, legacy industries rely heavily on long, unstructured documents to store high-value information. Reliably extracting this information into structured, machine-readable representations is a key prerequisite to making the contents accessible to automated systems. JSON is a natural target for such structured extraction, yet constructing reliable and scalable text-to-JSON training data remains challenging. To address this gap, we propose STAGE (Spreadsheet-grounded Text-to-JSON Artifact GEneration), a source-grounded data generation pipeline that constructs reports and JSON schema by using LLMs for scalable synthesis while validating ground-truth values against the underlying spreadsheet. Evaluations on STAGE-Eval, our source-grounded benchmark with an 851-example test set, show that STAGE produces stronger training data than existing approaches. This improves Qwen3-4B exact match from 31.37% to 74.27% and value accuracy from 45.46% to 90.69%.

Predictive code completion greatly accelerates how quickly developers work. In spreadsheets, despite being much more common, such auto-completion features are virtually non-existent. To address this gap, we introduce a benchmark for systems that observe a sequence of user actions in a spreadsheet and predict future actions. Two challenges are (1) the absence of edit histories in public spreadsheet corpora and (2) the complex space of spreadsheet actions (spatial, temporal, composite). To address (1), we manually curate 52 sequences of 12K actions that recreate spreadsheets from public corpora, seeded by parametrized heuristics and LLM refinement. To address (2), we propose an online evaluation that expects a prediction after each user action, accepts or rejects that prediction, updates the future actions upon acceptance, and repeats this until the target spreadsheet is obtained. We use multiple baseline predictors (including zero-shot LLMs, fine-tuned SLMs, and classical models) and analyze different properties that our benchmark teaches us, including but not limited to: properties of saved actions and false positives, efficiency, effect of user profiles, effect of triggers, and effect of context.

Spreadsheets and tables are widely used representations for structured data analysis, but effective analysis still requires substantial manual effort and domain expertise. Recent large language model (LLM) agents can automate parts of this process, but they often provide limited transparency into intermediate decisions, rely on implicit assumptions, struggle with multi-table comparison, and repeat similar workflows without adapting to a user's preferences. This paper presents TabClaw, an open-source interactive AI agent for spreadsheet manipulation and table reasoning. Users upload CSV or Excel files and issue natural-language requests; TabClaw clarifies ambiguous intent, exposes an editable execution plan, streams a ReAct-style tool-using analysis loop, dispatches specialist agents for parallel multi-table reasoning, and synthesizes findings with explicit consensus and uncertainty markers. Beyond one-off analysis, TabClaw records completed workflows, extracts persistent user memory, distills reusable skills from repeated tool-use patterns, supports package-style skill import, and upgrades skills from negative feedback. Experiments on spreadsheet manipulation and table reasoning benchmarks show that TabClaw improves executable task completion and reasoning performance while preserving an inspectable user workflow. This paper shows how TabClaw turns spreadsheets and tables into inspectable analytical workflows while gradually personalizing itself to recurring data-analysis tasks. Our code is available.

Attributing a synthetic utterance to its originating system remains an open challenge: closed-set models fail to reject unseen synthesizers and produce overconfident predictions. To address this, we propose a dual-branch gated fusion framework that pairs XLSR-53 with CORES, a 66-dimensional descriptor that, unlike prior Linear Filter Bank (LFB)-only work, spans cepstral, oscillatory, rhythmic, energy, and spectral dimensions to capture complementary synthesis artifacts. Our analysis shows XLSR-53 remains discriminative in-domain (ID) while CORES generalizes stably under distribution shift (OOD), yet their naive concatenation fails due to SSL representational imbalance. To resolve this, an input-conditioned gate adaptively weights each branch under joint training with cross-entropy, an energy margin loss for ID/OOD separation, and a gate diversity term. On the MLAAD benchmark, our system achieves 97.6% ID accuracy, 4.9% EERc, and an 83.5% relative FPR95 reduction over the Interspeech 2025 baseline.

Multi-target cross-lingual text summarization (MTXLS), which summarizes a source document into multiple target languages, is increasingly important as users consume content in diverse languages, but remains underexplored. To address this gap, we introduce multi-target cross-lingual element-aware (MEA), a new MTXLS benchmark covering 24 target languages. We benchmark end-to-end and pipeline approaches across various LLMs and show that MTXLS performance still substantially lags behind English monolingual summarization. To better understand MTXLS in LLMs, we propose a layer-wise analysis framework for investigating how LLMs internally perform MTXLS. Our analyses suggest that translation and summarization behaviors emerge jointly within later layers rather than as distinctly decomposed stages. Most task-relevant processing occurs within these layers, and errors also tend to arise at similar depths. Motivated by these findings, we introduce an inference-time activation steering method that leverages hidden representations from English summarization to guide MTXLS generation. Experiments show that our method consistently improves MTXLS quality across target languages.

We present BlueFin, a benchmark that tasks large language model (LLM) agents with synthesis, manipulation, and comprehension tasks over spreadsheet workbooks in the professional finance domain. Though estimates of the global population of paying users of spreadsheet software range in the hundreds of millions -- an order of magnitude more than the estimated global population of professional developers -- comparatively fewer resources have been devoted to exploring and expanding LLM capabilities in the spreadsheet domain, with fewer still dedicated to mirroring real occupational tasks encountered by those in professional finance roles. In response, we curate a set of 131 challenging, complex tasks with real-world relevance in the domain, containing 3,225 granular rubric criteria; notably, our rubric criteria and LM judge evaluations are validated by a team of expert human annotators, resulting in high-quality, granular evaluations of complex tasks that are difficult to verify programmatically but can be reliably evaluated by an LM judge agent. Our judge achieves parity with expert consensus ($α=0.826$) with a macro-F1 score of 0.839. Frontier LLMs demonstrate poor performance on the challenging benchmark, with the strongest LLMs achieving less than 50% average scores across tasks -- models exhibit particular weaknesses in dynamic correctness. Our contributions include a dataset of examples across three categories of spreadsheet tasks, an open source harness and agentic evaluation framework, and a characterization of existing frontier models' performance on our benchmark.

LLM agents are increasingly expected to carry out end-to-end workflows, producing complete artifacts from high-level user instructions. To meet enterprise needs, frontier AI labs have developed agents that can construct entire spreadsheets from scratch. This is especially relevant in finance, where core workflows such as financial modeling, forecasting, and scenario analysis are commonly conducted through spreadsheets. Yet, existing spreadsheet benchmarks do not measure this advanced capability, focusing instead on question-answering or single-formula edits. To address this gap, we provide one of the first evaluations of agents on end-to-end spreadsheet tasks, focusing on economically critical financial workflows such as modeling and scenario analysis. Since deliverables therein are routinely reviewed and revised by multiple stakeholders, judging their quality necessarily involves high-level criteria such as readability or ease of modification. To reflect the multidimensional nature of solution quality, we develop an evaluation taxonomy comprising three dimensions: Accuracy, Formula, and Format, each comprising fine-grained criteria that reflect professional standards. The Claude family leads the benchmark and produces the most professional-looking outputs in our qualitative review, but even the strongest agents frequently fall short of professional finance standards and degrade sharply as the difficulty increases beyond a few chained calculations. This suggests that current agents are not yet able to reliably produce professional-quality spreadsheets at the level of complexity real-world workflows demand.

Spreadsheet systems (e.g., Microsoft Excel, Google Sheets) play a central role in modern data-centric workflows. As AI agents grow increasingly capable of automating complex tasks, such as controlling computers and generating presentations, building an AI-driven spreadsheet agent has emerged as a promising research direction. Most existing spreadsheet agents rely on specialized prompting over general-purpose LLMs; while this design has potentials on simple spreadsheet operations, it struggles to manage the complex, multi-step workflows typical of real-world applications. We introduce Spreadsheet-RL, a reinforcement learning (RL) fine-tuning framework designed to train specialized spreadsheet agents within a realistic Microsoft Excel environment. Spreadsheet-RL features an automated pipeline for scalable collection of paired start-goal spreadsheets from online forums, as well as domain-specific evaluation tasks in areas such as finance and supply chain management, which we compile into the new Domain-Spreadsheet benchmark dataset. It also includes a Spreadsheet Gym environment designed for multi-turn RL: Spreadsheet Gym exposes extensive Excel functionality through a Python sandbox, along with a refined harness that incorporates a comprehensive tool set and carefully designed tool-routing rules for spreadsheet tasks. Through comprehensive experiments, we show that Spreadsheet-RL substantially enhances AI agent's performance on both general and domain-specific spreadsheet tasks: it improves Qwen3-4B-Thinking-2507's Pass@1 on SpreadsheetBench from 12.0% to 23.4%, and raises Pass@1 from 8.4% to 17.2% on our curated Domain-Spreadsheet dataset. These results highlight Spreadsheet-RL's strong potential for generalization and real-world adoption in spreadsheet automation, and broadly, its promise for advancing LLM-based interactions with data interfaces in everyday work.

Workbook-scale spreadsheet understanding is increasingly important for language-model-based data analysis agents, but remains challenging because relevant information is often distributed across multiple sheets with heterogeneous schemas, layouts, and implicit relationships. Existing retrieval-augmented approaches typically decompose spreadsheets into rows, columns, or blocks to improve scalability; however, such chunk-centric representations can fragment worksheets into isolated text spans and weaken global sheet-level semantics. We propose Sheet as Token, a graph-enhanced framework that treats each worksheet as a unified semantic unit for multi-sheet spreadsheet retrieval. Our method extracts schema-aware records from sheet names, column headers, representative values, and layout features, and encodes each worksheet into a compact dense token. Given a natural-language query, a Graph Retriever constructs a query-specific candidate graph over sheet tokens using semantic, query-conditioned, schema-consistency, and shape-compatibility relations, and composes these channels through a multi-stage graph transformer to retrieve supporting sheet sets. Experiments on a constructed multi-sheet spreadsheet corpus show that sheet-level tokenization learns stable representations, and that graph-enhanced cross-sheet reasoning improves listwise retrieval over a shallow graph baseline with limited additional graph-side computation. These results suggest that sheet-level tokenization is a promising abstraction for scalable multi-sheet spreadsheet understanding.

This paper investigates how GPT-based tools can assist in building reusable analytical spreadsheet models. After a screening, we evaluate five GPT extensions and select Excel AI by pulsrai.com for detailed testing. Through structured experiments on simple problem statements, we assess Excel AI's performance against the ERFR criteria (each input in a cell; cell formulas; no hardwired numbers; labels; accurate). Results show that while Excel AI can produce well-structured models, it is inconsistent and often non-reproducible. We identify two central challenges - "the problem of confidence" and "the problem of workflow" - which highlight the need for skilled users to verify and adapt GPT-generated spreadsheets. Though GPTs show promise for generating draft models that may reduce development time or lower skill requirements, current tools remain unreliable for professional use. We conclude with recommendations for future research into prompt engineering, reproducibility, and larger-scale modeling tasks.

Advances in AI agent capabilities have outpaced users' ability to meaningfully oversee their execution. AI agents can perform sophisticated, multi-step knowledge work autonomously from start to finish, yet this process remains effectively inaccessible during execution, often buried within large volumes of intermediate reasoning and outputs: by the time users receive the output, all underlying decisions have already been made without their involvement. This lack of transparency leaves users unable to examine the agent's assumptions, identify errors before they propagate, or redirect execution when it deviates from their intent. The stakes are particularly high in spreadsheet environments, where process and artifact are inseparable. Each decision the agent makes is recorded directly in cells that belong to and reflect on the user. We introduce Pista, a spreadsheet AI agent that decomposes execution into auditable, controllable actions, providing users with visibility into the agent's decision-making process and the capacity to intervene at each step. A formative study (N = 8) and a within-subjects summative evaluation (N = 16) comparing Pista to a baseline agent demonstrated that active participation in execution influenced not only task outcomes but also users' comprehension of the task, their perception of the agent, and their sense of role within the workflow. Users identified their own intent reflected in the agent's actions, detected errors that post-hoc review would have failed to surface, and reported a sense of co-ownership over the resulting output. These findings indicate that meaningful human oversight of AI agents in knowledge work requires not improved post-hoc review mechanisms, but active participation in decisions as they are made.

We consider the task of end-to-end spreadsheet generation, where language models produce spreadsheet artifacts to satisfy users' explicit and implicit constraints, specified in natural language. We introduce SpreadsheetArena, a platform for evaluating models' performance on the task via blind pairwise preference votes of LLM-generated spreadsheet workbooks. As with other complex, open-ended tasks, relevant evaluation criteria can vary greatly across use cases, often in ways that are difficult to formalize. Compared to general dialogue or text generation settings, spreadsheet generation presents unique challenges and opportunities: the task output structure is well-defined and multi-dimensional, and there are often complex interactivity and layout considerations. We observe that stylistic, structural, and functional features of preferred spreadsheets vary meaningfully across prompts. Expert evaluations of spreadsheets for finance prompts suggest that even highly ranked models do not reliably produce spreadsheets aligned with domain-specific best practices. We host a live arena and release a dataset of prompts, generated spreadsheets, and preference votes, which we hope will facilitate further study of tasks operating over spreadsheets as a challenging and interesting class of complex, open-ended tasks for LLMs.

We present SheetMind, a modular multi-agent framework powered by large language models (LLMs) for spreadsheet automation via natural language instructions. In this paper, we introduce a hierarchical agentic system consisting of three specialized agents: Manager Agent that decomposes complex user instructions into subtasks; an Action Agent that translates these into structured commands using a Backus-Naur Form (BNF) grammar; and a Reflection Agent that validates alignment between generated actions and the user's original intent. We evaluate SheetMind on the 221-task SheetCopilot Benchmark with GPT-3.5-Turbo. SheetMind achieved 100% execution success and 54.8% functional correctness, exceeding SheetCopilot (44.3%) while maintaining perfect execution reliability. We also conduct ablation study on a separately curated dataset to confirm that the full three-agent configuration consistently outperforms all partial variants. Lastly, we integrate our system into Google Sheets via a Workspace extension.