Evaluates large language models' context-sensitive reasoning and decision-making capabilities in autonomous driving scenarios. It probes physics-based calculations, policy compliance, risk interpretation, and maneuver optimization through multiple-choice questions derived from structured driving simulations. Use when the user wants to benchmark on AgentDrive-MCQ, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports accuracy.
Scanned 9/11/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add qhjqhj00/research-skills-pool --skill agentdrive-mcq-eval --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Agentdrive Mcq Eval?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/qhjqhj00-agentdrive-mcq-eval)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: agentdrive-mcq-eval
description: Evaluates large language models' context-sensitive reasoning and decision-making capabilities in autonomous driving scenarios. It probes physics-based calculations, policy compliance, risk interpretation, and maneuver optimization through multiple-choice questions derived from structured driving simulations. Use when the user wants to benchmark on AgentDrive-MCQ, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports accuracy.
metadata:
skill_kind: dataset_eval
source_arxiv: 2601.16964
bibtex_key: ferrag2026agentdrive
confidence: high
---
# agentdrive-mcq-eval
> AgentDrive: An Open Benchmark Dataset for Agentic AI Reasoning with LLM-Generated Scenarios in Autonomous Systems — Ferrag et al. (2026) (arXiv:2601.16964, 2026)
## What this evaluates
Evaluates large language models' context-sensitive reasoning and decision-making capabilities in autonomous driving scenarios. It probes physics-based calculations, policy compliance, risk interpretation, and maneuver optimization through multiple-choice questions derived from structured driving simulations.
## Datasets
- **AgentDrive-MCQ** — total 100000; splits: test (2000); repo https://github.com/maferrag/AgentDrive
## Metrics
- `accuracy` **(primary)** — range: percent
- Percentage of correctly answered multiple-choice questions. Calculated as (number of correct predictions / total number of questions) * 100.
## Input / output format
**Input**: A natural language description of a driving scenario (10-12 sentences) followed by a reasoning-intensive multiple-choice question with four candidate answers.
**Output**: A single selected answer choice (e.g., A, B, C, or D) corresponding to the correct option.
## Scoring recipe
```python
correct = 0
for pred, gold in zip(predictions, gold_answers):
if pred.strip().upper() == gold.strip().upper():
correct += 1
accuracy = (correct / len(predictions)) * 100
```
## Common pitfalls
- Models are evaluated with deterministic decoding (temperature=0.0), which may disadvantage reasoning-focused models that typically benefit from higher temperature sampling.
- The benchmark only scores the final selected answer choice, ignoring the quality or correctness of the model-generated rationale, even though rationales are part of the prompt/output structure.
## Evidence (verbatim from paper)
> We introduce AgentDrive-MCQ, a benchmark designed to probe the reasoning and decision-making capabilities of large language models (LLMs) when deployed as agentic controllers in autonomous driving. TABLE V: Accuracy (%) results of 50 examined LLM reasoning models evaluated across multiple reasoning styles using 2k samples from AgentDrive-MCQ.
## Citation
```bibtex
@misc{ferrag2026agentdrive,
title={AgentDrive: An Open Benchmark Dataset for Agentic AI Reasoning with LLM-Generated Scenarios in Autonomous Systems},
author={Ferrag et al. (2026)},
year={2026},
note={arXiv:2601.16964}
}
```
- arXiv: 2601.16964
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!