Evaluates vision-language models' ability to actively navigate long, visually rich documents to gather evidence and answer complex queries. It probes multi-turn reasoning, retrieval accuracy, and the effectiveness of direct page-index access versus semantic search. Use when the user wants to benchmark on MMLongBench, LongDocURL, PaperTab, PaperText, FetaTab, DUDE-sub, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports GPT-4o–judged answer accuracy (Acc).
Scanned 9/11/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add qhjqhj00/research-skills-pool --skill alden-vrdu-eval --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Alden Vrdu Eval?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/qhjqhj00-alden-vrdu-eval)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: alden-vrdu-eval
description: Evaluates vision-language models' ability to actively navigate long, visually rich documents to gather evidence and answer complex queries. It probes multi-turn reasoning, retrieval accuracy, and the effectiveness of direct page-index access versus semantic search. Use when the user wants to benchmark on MMLongBench, LongDocURL, PaperTab, PaperText, FetaTab, DUDE-sub, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports GPT-4o–judged answer accuracy (Acc).
metadata:
skill_kind: dataset_eval
source_arxiv: 2510.25668
bibtex_key: yang2025alden
confidence: high
---
# alden-vrdu-eval
> ALDEN: Reinforcement Learning for Active Navigation and Evidence Gathering in Long Documents — Yang et al. (2025) (arXiv:2510.25668, 2025)
## What this evaluates
Evaluates vision-language models' ability to actively navigate long, visually rich documents to gather evidence and answer complex queries. It probes multi-turn reasoning, retrieval accuracy, and the effectiveness of direct page-index access versus semantic search.
## Datasets
- **MMLongBench** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **LongDocURL** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **PaperTab** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **PaperText** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **FetaTab** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **DUDE-sub** — total 960; splits: val (960)
## Metrics
- `GPT-4o–judged answer accuracy (Acc)` **(primary)** — range: [0, 1]
- GPT-4o evaluates the correctness of the model's final generated answer against the ground truth reference.
- `trajectory-level retrieval recall (Rec)` — range: [0, 1]
- Ratio of correctly retrieved pages to the total number of ground-truth relevant pages in the document.
- `trajectory-level retrieval precision (Pre)` — range: [0, 1]
- Ratio of correctly retrieved pages to the total number of pages retrieved by the agent during the trajectory.
- `F1-score (F1)` — range: [0, 1]
- Harmonic mean of trajectory-level precision and recall.
- `number of unique collected pages (#UP)` — range: other
- Count of distinct pages accessed or retrieved by the agent across all reasoning-action turns.
## Input / output format
**Input**: User query paired with a long, multi-page visually rich document. The model receives page images and can iteratively perform semantic search or direct page-index fetch actions.
**Output**: A multi-turn sequence of reasoning steps and actions (search/fetch), terminating in a final natural language answer string.
## Scoring recipe
```python
# Answer Accuracy
acc = gpt4o_judge(model.final_answer, ground_truth)
# Trajectory Metrics
retrieved = set(agent_trajectory.retrieved_pages)
relevant = set(ground_truth.relevant_pages)
rec = len(retrieved & relevant) / len(relevant) if relevant else 0
pre = len(retrieved & relevant) / len(retrieved) if retrieved else 0
f1 = 2 * (pre * rec) / (pre + rec) if (pre + rec) > 0 else 0
up = len(retrieved)
```
## Common pitfalls
- GPT-4o is used as the sole judge for answer accuracy, which may introduce subjective bias or inconsistency compared to deterministic exact-match metrics.
- Retrieval metrics (Rec, Pre, F1) are computed at the trajectory level, meaning they depend on the full multi-turn interaction history and the maximum turn limit (T=6).
- Baselines are evaluated with different retriever backbones (single-vector vs. multi-vector); comparing relative improvements requires matching retriever configurations to ensure fairness.
## Evidence (verbatim from paper)
> The primary evaluation metric is GPT-4o–judged answer accuracy (Acc) on each benchmark. For finer-grained analysis of ALDEN’s components, we further assess navigation quality using trajectory-level retrieval recall (Rec), precision (Pre), F1-score (F1), and the number of unique collected pages (#UP).
## Citation
```bibtex
@misc{yang2025alden,
title={ALDEN: Reinforcement Learning for Active Navigation and Evidence Gathering in Long Documents},
author={Yang et al. (2025)},
year={2025},
note={arXiv:2510.25668}
}
```
- arXiv: 2510.25668
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!