Evaluates an agent's ability to perform logical deduction and multi-hop reasoning over long, noise-rich unstructured text without pre-defined schemas or tables. It probes the model's capacity to actively synthesize scattered evidence and filter out irrelevant distractors to arrive at a correct decision. Use when the user wants to benchmark on TACT, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports Exact Match (EM).
Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Tact Eval?
Add the live security badge to your README. It updates with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/qhjqhj00-tact-eval)
---
name: tact-eval
description: Evaluates an agent's ability to perform logical deduction and multi-hop reasoning over long, noise-rich unstructured text without pre-defined schemas or tables. It probes the model's capacity to actively synthesize scattered evidence and filter out irrelevant distractors to arrive at a correct decision. Use when the user wants to benchmark on TACT, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports Exact Match (EM).
metadata:
skill_kind: dataset_eval
source_arxiv: 2604.14930
bibtex_key: lv2026ieascache
confidence: high
---
# tact-eval
> IE as Cache: Information Extraction Enhanced Agentic Reasoning — Hang Lv et al. (2026) (arXiv:2604.14930, 2026)
## What this evaluates
Evaluates an agent's ability to perform logical deduction and multi-hop reasoning over long, noise-rich unstructured text without pre-defined schemas or tables. It probes the model's capacity to actively synthesize scattered evidence and filter out irrelevant distractors to arrive at a correct decision.
## Datasets
- **TACT** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
## Metrics
- `Exact Match (EM)` **(primary)** — range: [0, 1]
- 1 if the predicted answer exactly matches the ground-truth answer, 0 otherwise. Measures whether the produced answer satisfies the target decision or constraint.
## Input / output format
**Input**: Long-form unstructured text containing logical reasoning problems, paired with a query or instruction requiring deduction.
**Output**: A final answer string that satisfies the target decision or constraint.
## Scoring recipe
```python
def score_em(pred, gold):
return 1.0 if pred.strip().lower() == gold.strip().lower() else 0.0
# Average over test set
em_scores = [score_em(p, g) for p, g in zip(predictions, gold_answers)]
final_metric = sum(em_scores) / len(em_scores)
```
## Common pitfalls
- Models often fail to aggregate scattered evidence correctly when contexts are filled with irrelevant distractors.
- Exact match requires strict formatting; minor phrasing variations or extra punctuation will result in a score of 0.
- Static extraction baselines struggle because they cannot iteratively update their information state during multi-hop reasoning.
## Evidence (verbatim from paper)
> For TACT and Calendar Scheduling, we report Exact Match (EM), which directly measures whether the produced answer satisfies the target decision/constraints.
## Citation
```bibtex
@misc{lv2026ieascache,
title={IE as Cache: Information Extraction Enhanced Agentic Reasoning},
author={Hang Lv et al. (2026)},
year={2026},
note={arXiv:2604.14930}
}
```
- arXiv: 2604.14930