Reported in recent model launches
These model reports include this benchmark. Their harnesses, task subsets, scoring policies, and resource budgets can differ; follow each report’s evaluation notes before joining the numbers.
What it measures
Presentation-generation tasks assess language-model agents producing slides from practical requests.
How to read the result
Inspect factual grounding, narrative structure, visual communication, and editability as distinct aspects of the artifact.
Limits and comparison traps
The launch describes multiple slide-generation tools and a calibrated grader. Tool availability and preference grading are part of the reported system.
Published evaluation
Exact values from the publisher’s embedded full comparison table. Maximum effort, fallback settings and dated model versions remain in model labels. Blank cells stay missing. Source footnotes specify mixed harnesses and externally quoted comparisons; this is a launch-reported cohort rather than a new independent evaluation. Internal preference Elo for presentation or graphic-design work, judged automatically with calibration against over 10,000 human judgments; different arenas have independent rating scales.
Where this fits in an evaluation suite
A transcript that says “done” is weaker evidence than the verified final state. Track policy violations, recoveries, and invalid attempts alongside success.
Start with a capability hypothesis, then choose a second test with a different failure mode. Keep the checkpoint, reasoning effort, agent tools, sampling policy, and scoring procedure fixed when measuring a training intervention. Record failures and missing outputs in the denominator.
A reproducible comparison
Exact values from the publisher’s embedded full comparison table. Maximum effort, fallback settings and dated model versions remain in model labels. Blank cells stay missing. Source footnotes specify mixed harnesses and externally quoted comparisons; this is a launch-reported cohort rather than a new independent evaluation. Internal preference Elo for presentation or graphic-design work, judged automatically with calibration against over 10,000 human judgments; different arenas have independent rating scales.
Publish the exact run configuration, item coverage, score units, and available uncertainty. If a source supplies only an aggregate or a single run, preserve that limit. A new model name or a rounded score alone does not establish a capability improvement.
PRIMARY EVIDENCE & FURTHER READING
Reviewed 2026-10-27. Explanation and interpretation by RLTasks. Benchmark ownership remains with its original authors.