BEAMS: Benchmarking and Evaluating AI for Modeling and Simulation

arXiv cs.AI Papers

Summary

The BEAMS Initiative presents a benchmark suite for evaluating AI tools in modeling and simulation, focusing on human-centered and responsible AI practices. Tests reveal variability across LLM-based engines, with better performance in qualitative tasks than causal reasoning.

arXiv:2605.28994v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: AI tools to support real world decision making must be able to build simulation models that inform their recommendations and render them interpretable. Tools that can automate aspects of modeling practice must complement human expertise, not replace it. The BEAMS Initiative aims to guide the development of AI tools for modeling and simulation toward forms that are responsible and ethical by establishing benchmarks for human centered modeling and simulation practices. The initiative uses open digital and organizational infrastructure to collaboratively evaluate AI tools for modeling and simulation. The open source sd ai project hosted by the initiative establishes transparency and enables contributions to be shared broadly. A steering group focuses on prioritizing potential benchmarks, while a technical group focuses on implementing the benchmarks in the form of automated tests. Tests for several distinct categories of evaluation have been implemented and applied to AI tools that support qualitative model building, quantitative model building, and model discussion. These include tests for causal translation, model iteration, causal reasoning, conformance, model behavior explanation, suggested model building steps, and suggested model fixes. When engines from the sd ai project are coupled with different LLMs, their performance on these evaluations reveals variability across different AI tools. The evaluations implemented by the initiative demonstrate that AI enabled modeling tools perform better at discussion and basic qualitative tasks than with causal reasoning and quantitative error fixing. No single LLM dominates across engine types, highlighting the importance of specific tasks and tradeoffs between speed and accuracy. Ongoing efforts of the initiative aim to incorporate benchmarks that address concerns about bias by considering alternative perspectives and human centered use cases.
Original Article
View Cached Full Text

Cached at: 05/29/26, 09:11 AM

# BEAMS: Benchmarking and Evaluating AI for Modeling and Simulation
Source: [https://arxiv.org/abs/2605.28994](https://arxiv.org/abs/2605.28994)
[View PDF](https://arxiv.org/pdf/2605.28994)

> Abstract:AI tools to support real world decision making must be able to build simulation models that inform their recommendations and render them interpretable\. Tools that can automate aspects of modeling practice must complement human expertise, not replace it\. The BEAMS Initiative aims to guide the development of AI tools for modeling and simulation toward forms that are responsible and ethical by establishing benchmarks for human centered modeling and simulation practices\. The initiative uses open digital and organizational infrastructure to collaboratively evaluate AI tools for modeling and simulation\. The open source sd ai project hosted by the initiative establishes transparency and enables contributions to be shared broadly\. A steering group focuses on prioritizing potential benchmarks, while a technical group focuses on implementing the benchmarks in the form of automated tests\. Tests for several distinct categories of evaluation have been implemented and applied to AI tools that support qualitative model building, quantitative model building, and model discussion\. These include tests for causal translation, model iteration, causal reasoning, conformance, model behavior explanation, suggested model building steps, and suggested model fixes\. When engines from the sd ai project are coupled with different LLMs, their performance on these evaluations reveals variability across different AI tools\. The evaluations implemented by the initiative demonstrate that AI enabled modeling tools perform better at discussion and basic qualitative tasks than with causal reasoning and quantitative error fixing\. No single LLM dominates across engine types, highlighting the importance of specific tasks and tradeoffs between speed and accuracy\. Ongoing efforts of the initiative aim to incorporate benchmarks that address concerns about bias by considering alternative perspectives and human centered use cases\.

## Submission history

From: Sara Metcalf \[[view email](https://arxiv.org/show-email/880a9fb3/2605.28994)\] **\[v1\]**Wed, 27 May 2026 18:51:00 UTC \(429 KB\)

Similar Articles

Good Benchmarks

arXiv cs.AI

This paper from July 2026 defines principles for designing effective benchmark tasks for AI agents, drawing on experience from the Terminal Bench project. Good tasks are correct, solvable, verifiable, well-specified, and hard for interesting reasons, with an emphasis on real-world relevance and outcome-based verification.

Unsteady Metrics and Benchmarking Cultures of AI Model Builders

arXiv cs.AI

This paper introduces Benchmarking-Cultures-25, a dataset analyzing how AI model builders selectively highlight benchmarks in press releases. It finds a fragmented evaluation landscape with limited cross-model comparability, arguing that benchmarks are used as narrative devices for market positioning rather than standardized scientific measurement.