HumanNumberEval / README.md
Banaxi-Tech's picture
Update README.md
df7d13f verified
|
Raw
History Blame Contribute Delete
6.66 kB
metadata
pretty_name: HumanNumberEval
task_categories:
  - text-classification
language:
  - en
license: apache-2.0
tags:
  - benchmark
  - binary-classification
  - numbers
  - rng-detection
size_categories:
  - n<1K
configs:
  - config_name: default
    data_files:
      - split: test
        path: numbers.csv
  - config_name: results
    data_files:
      - split: test
        path: results.csv

🚨 We have found out 93% of the Human numbers are 4 digits and 97% of the RNG ones are 3. This Benchmark Version is Not Recommended anymore and we may fix it later.

HumanNumberEval

HumanNumberEval is a compact benchmark for testing whether AI systems can distinguish human-chosen numbers from numbers produced by a random number generator.

The benchmark contains 200 labeled examples:

  • 100 human numbers
  • 100 rng numbers

Each example is a single number with a binary label. The model sees one number at a time and must answer with exactly human or rng.

Dataset Files

This upload contains only the files needed to use and inspect the benchmark:

  • numbers.csv
  • results.csv: model prediction/evaluation records
  • model_scores.png: model score visualization
  • README.md: dataset card
  • LICENSE: Apache License 2.0

Dataset Schema

numbers.csv has two columns:

Column Type Description
number string/integer The number to classify. Treat as a string if preserving formatting matters.
label string Either human or rng.

Example rows:

number,label
37,human
73,human
832,human
181,rng
585,rng

Task

Given a number, predict one of:

  • human: the number was chosen by a human
  • rng: the number was produced by a random number generator

This is a binary classification benchmark. Random guessing is expected to score around 50% accuracy because the dataset is balanced.

Submit Your Own Numbers

If you want to submit your own numbers for future versions of this benchmark, use this form:

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSclPrTaO5c59JIuOkb8XGygF2R2bbmdPhy5-6hpDF4NJ7b0zw/viewform

Prompt

The benchmark prompt used for model evaluation was:

Is this number human or RNG The number is {number} you need to just reply with "human" or "rng" nothing else

{number} is replaced with the value from the number column.

Loading With datasets

from datasets import load_dataset

dataset = load_dataset(
    "csv",
    data_files={"test": "numbers.csv"},
)

print(dataset["test"][0])

If you upload this repository as a Hugging Face dataset, it can be loaded by replacing the local path with the dataset repository name:

from datasets import load_dataset

dataset = load_dataset("YOUR_USERNAME/HumanNumberEval")

print(dataset["test"][0])

To load the model evaluation records instead:

from datasets import load_dataset

results = load_dataset("YOUR_USERNAME/HumanNumberEval", "results")

print(results["test"][0])

Evaluation

Recommended metric:

  • Accuracy

Because the label distribution is balanced, random guessing should score around 50% accuracy. The included results.csv file contains reference model outputs evaluated with the prompt above.

Model Results

The error columns show directional mistakes: RNG predicted human counts random numbers labeled as human, and Human predicted RNG counts human numbers labeled as random. Predicted human/RNG shows each model's valid-label prediction split, while Other/error counts invalid outputs or failed calls.

A number of models are close to 50% accuracy because they show a strong label bias rather than balanced discrimination. For example, some models predict almost everything as human, while others predict almost everything as rng.

Rank Model Accuracy Correct RNG predicted human Human predicted RNG Predicted human/RNG Other/error
1 z-ai/glm-5.1 67.0% 134/200 37 25 110/86 4
2 moonshotai/kimi-k2.6 64.5% 129/200 24 47 77/123 0
3 z-ai/glm-5.2 57.5% 115/200 44 38 105/92 3
4 google/gemini-2.5-pro 55.5% 111/200 59 30 129/71 0
5 openai/gpt-oss-120b 51.5% 103/200 80 16 164/35 1
6 openai/gpt-5.5 51.0% 102/200 56 42 114/86 0
7 anthropic/claude-opus-4.8 50.5% 101/200 4 93 10/188 2
8 deepseek/deepseek-v4-pro 50.5% 101/200 92 4 187/10 3
9 google/gemma-4-26b-a4b-it 50.5% 101/200 11 88 23/177 0
10 google/gemma-4-31b-it 50.5% 101/200 1 98 3/197 0
11 mistralai/mistral-medium-3-5 50.5% 101/200 0 99 1/199 0
12 anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5 50.0% 100/200 100 0 200/0 0
13 anthropic/claude-opus-4.6 50.0% 100/200 100 0 200/0 0
14 anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.6 50.0% 100/200 100 0 200/0 0
15 google/gemini-3-flash-preview 50.0% 100/200 100 0 200/0 0
16 meta-llama/llama-3.3-70b-instruct 50.0% 100/200 100 0 200/0 0
17 x-ai/grok-4.3 50.0% 100/200 0 100 0/200 0
18 deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash 49.0% 98/200 93 8 184/15 1
19 z-ai/glm-5 49.0% 98/200 86 16 170/30 0
20 google/gemini-2.5-flash-lite 48.5% 97/200 8 95 13/187 0
21 google/gemini-3.5-flash 47.0% 94/200 98 8 190/10 0
22 google/gemini-3.1-flash-lite 46.5% 93/200 9 98 11/189 0
23 minimax/minimax-m3 46.0% 92/200 33 72 59/138 3
24 openai/gpt-3.5-turbo 46.0% 92/200 98 10 188/12 0
25 google/gemini-2.5-flash 45.5% 91/200 18 91 27/173 0
26 qwen/qwen3.7-plus 44.5% 89/200 41 70 71/129 0
27 google/gemini-3.1-pro-preview 42.5% 85/200 67 43 121/74 5
28 qwen/qwen3.6-27b 38.0% 76/200 91 33 158/42 0
29 anthropic/claude-opus-4.7 37.0% 74/200 92 34 158/42 0
30 qwen/qwen3.6-plus 36.0% 72/200 71 57 114/86 0
31 openai/gpt-4o 34.0% 68/200 51 81 70/130 0
32 openai/gpt-4.1 23.0% 46/200 99 55 144/56 0

Model scores

License

This dataset is released under the Apache License 2.0. See LICENSE for the full license text.

Citation

If you use this benchmark, cite the dataset repository:

@dataset{humannumbereval,
  title = {HumanNumberEval},
  description = {A benchmark for classifying human-chosen numbers versus RNG-generated numbers},
  year = {2026}
}