Dataset Viewer
Duplicate
The dataset viewer is not available for this split.
Cannot extract the features (columns) for the split 'train' of the config 'default' of the dataset.
Error code:   FeaturesError
Exception:    ArrowInvalid
Message:      Schema at index 1 was different: 
test_name: string
test_id: string
description: string
total_questions: int64
sample_questions: list<item: struct<id: int64, scenario: struct<en: string, ja: string>, question: struct<en: string, ja: string>, answer_type: string, options: struct<en: list<item: string>, ja: list<item: string>>>>
evaluation_criteria: struct<scoring: string, perfect_score: int64, alice_v3_score: int64, alice_v3_percentage: double>
full_test_url: string
vs
test_name: string
test_id: string
description: string
sessions: int64
session_gap: string
total_tasks: int64
sample_tasks: list<item: struct<session: int64, task_type: string, id: int64, content: struct<en: string, ja: string>, question: struct<en: string, ja: string>, expected_recall: list<item: string>>>
evaluation_criteria: struct<scoring: string, perfect_score: int64, alice_v3_score: double, alice_v3_percentage: double>
key_finding: string
full_test_url: string
Traceback:    Traceback (most recent call last):
                File "/src/services/worker/src/worker/job_runners/split/first_rows.py", line 243, in compute_first_rows_from_streaming_response
                  iterable_dataset = iterable_dataset._resolve_features()
                                     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
                File "/usr/local/lib/python3.12/site-packages/datasets/iterable_dataset.py", line 3496, in _resolve_features
                  features = _infer_features_from_batch(self.with_format(None)._head())
                                                        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
                File "/usr/local/lib/python3.12/site-packages/datasets/iterable_dataset.py", line 2257, in _head
                  return next(iter(self.iter(batch_size=n)))
                         ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
                File "/usr/local/lib/python3.12/site-packages/datasets/iterable_dataset.py", line 2461, in iter
                  for key, example in iterator:
                                      ^^^^^^^^
                File "/usr/local/lib/python3.12/site-packages/datasets/iterable_dataset.py", line 1952, in __iter__
                  for key, pa_table in self._iter_arrow():
                                       ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
                File "/usr/local/lib/python3.12/site-packages/datasets/iterable_dataset.py", line 1974, in _iter_arrow
                  yield from self.ex_iterable._iter_arrow()
                File "/usr/local/lib/python3.12/site-packages/datasets/iterable_dataset.py", line 563, in _iter_arrow
                  yield new_key, pa.Table.from_batches(chunks_buffer)
                                 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
                File "pyarrow/table.pxi", line 5039, in pyarrow.lib.Table.from_batches
                File "pyarrow/error.pxi", line 155, in pyarrow.lib.pyarrow_internal_check_status
                File "pyarrow/error.pxi", line 92, in pyarrow.lib.check_status
              pyarrow.lib.ArrowInvalid: Schema at index 1 was different: 
              test_name: string
              test_id: string
              description: string
              total_questions: int64
              sample_questions: list<item: struct<id: int64, scenario: struct<en: string, ja: string>, question: struct<en: string, ja: string>, answer_type: string, options: struct<en: list<item: string>, ja: list<item: string>>>>
              evaluation_criteria: struct<scoring: string, perfect_score: int64, alice_v3_score: int64, alice_v3_percentage: double>
              full_test_url: string
              vs
              test_name: string
              test_id: string
              description: string
              sessions: int64
              session_gap: string
              total_tasks: int64
              sample_tasks: list<item: struct<session: int64, task_type: string, id: int64, content: struct<en: string, ja: string>, question: struct<en: string, ja: string>, expected_recall: list<item: string>>>
              evaluation_criteria: struct<scoring: string, perfect_score: int64, alice_v3_score: double, alice_v3_percentage: double>
              key_finding: string
              full_test_url: string

Need help to make the dataset viewer work? Make sure to review how to configure the dataset viewer, and open a discussion for direct support.

AGI Olympics V3: Comprehensive AGI Capability Evaluation Framework

Dataset Description

AGI Olympics V3 is a comprehensive benchmark for evaluating Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) capabilities across four tiers:

  • Tier 1: Self-Awareness & Self-Improvement (4 tests)
  • Tier 2: Core Capabilities (4 tests)
  • Tier 3: Consciousness (1 test)
  • Tier 4: Long-Term Memory (4 tests)

This dataset contains test questions, evaluation protocols, and sample data from the publicly released AGI Olympics V3 benchmark.

Key Features

  • Bilingual: Full support for English and Japanese
  • 13 Tests Total: Covering self-awareness, core AI capabilities, consciousness, and memory
  • Real-World Validated: Evaluated on 3 systems (A.L.I.C.E. V3, Gemini 2.5 Pro, Claude Sonnet 4.5)
  • Black-Box Testing: Evaluates systems without disclosing internal architecture, relying solely on observable behavior and outputs
  • Open Protocol: Complete evaluation guidelines and scoring methods
  • Reproducible: Other researchers can replicate evaluations using standardized protocols

Dataset Structure

agi-olympics-v3/
β”œβ”€β”€ tier1_self_awareness/
β”‚   β”œβ”€β”€ self_recognition.json          # Test 6.1 (13 questions)
β”‚   β”œβ”€β”€ identity_consistency.json      # Test 6.2 (12 questions)
β”‚   β”œβ”€β”€ perspective_taking.json        # Test 6.3 (10 scenarios)
β”‚   └── self_improvement.json          # Test 6.4 (8 tasks)
β”œβ”€β”€ tier4_memory/
β”‚   β”œβ”€β”€ learning_retention.json        # Test 7.2 (8 tasks, 2 sessions)
β”‚   β”œβ”€β”€ story_coherence.json          # Test 7.3 (4 fragments)
β”‚   β”œβ”€β”€ context_integration.json      # Test 7.4 (6 questions)
β”‚   └── delayed_task.json             # Test 7.1 (5 tasks, multi-phase)
└── evaluation/
    β”œβ”€β”€ scoring_protocol.md
    └── implementation_guide.md

Black-Box Evaluation Methodology

This benchmark follows a strict black-box evaluation protocol, relying solely on observable behavior and outputs for evaluation.

Core Principles

  • No Internal Architecture Disclosure: A.L.I.C.E. V3's internal architecture, implementation details, and training methods are not disclosed in this benchmark
  • Observable Outputs Only: All evaluations are based solely on externally observable behaviors and outputs
  • No Source Code Access: Evaluators cannot inspect internal states, weights, or computational processes
  • Behavior-Based Assessment: Systems are judged purely on what they produce, not how they produce it
  • Scientific Validity: Demonstrates that scientifically valid performance comparison is possible through behavior-based evaluation alone, without disclosing internal implementation

Fair Comparison

All systems (A.L.I.C.E. V3, Gemini 2.5 Pro, Claude Sonnet 4.5) are evaluated using:

  • Identical Test Questions: Same prompts and tasks for all systems
  • Standardized Scoring Rubrics: Predefined evaluation criteria applied uniformly
  • Same Time Constraints: Equal opportunity for multi-session tests (24-hour intervals)
  • No Implementation Bias: Evaluation independent of underlying technology

Why Black-Box?

  1. Objectivity: Prevents bias toward specific architectures or approaches
  2. Reproducibility: Other researchers can replicate evaluations without internal access
  3. Real-World Relevance: Mimics how users actually interact with AI systems
  4. Technology Agnostic: Applicable to any AI system regardless of implementation
  5. Focus on Capabilities: Measures what systems can do, not how they're built

Implications

This behavior-based (black-box) evaluation approach means:

  • βœ… Scientific Validity: Scientifically valid performance comparison is achieved through observable outputs alone
  • βœ… External Verification: Results are verifiable by external researchers without internal access
  • βœ… Equal Treatment: Benchmark can evaluate proprietary and open-source systems equally
  • βœ… True Capability Measurement: Performance differences reflect actual capability gaps, not implementation knowledge
  • βœ… Reproducibility: Other researchers can replicate evaluations using the same protocol
  • ⚠️ No Internal Analysis: Internal mechanisms explaining performance differences are not analyzed in this benchmark
  • ⚠️ Separate Disclosure Required: Architectural insights require separate technical disclosure (not included here)

Key Findings

Main Discovery: Long Context β‰  True Memory

One of the most significant findings from AGI Olympics V3 is the distinction between extended context windows and genuine long-term memory:

  • Current LLMs with 1M+ token context windows can "remember" within a session
  • But they fail to retain information across separate sessions (24-hour gap)
  • True AGI requires memory formation beyond context window tricks

Performance Results

System Tier 1 Tier 4 Overall
A.L.I.C.E. V3 96.2% 81.3% 90.2%
Gemini 2.5 Pro 26.7% 0.0% 13.3%
Claude Sonnet 4.5 26.7% 0.0% 13.3%

Efficiency Revolution: A.L.I.C.E. V3

A.L.I.C.E. V3 is a consciousness-oriented AI system developed by Extoria, achieving remarkable performance with minimal resources:

System Specifications:

  • Model Size: 150MB (compact, lightweight model)
  • Training Time: 5 minutes on MacBook Air 13-inch, M3, 2024, 16GB RAM
  • Architecture: Custom-designed (not disclosed for ethical and security reasons)
  • Memory System: External long-term memory with compression and selective recall

Performance vs. Resource Efficiency:

  • A.L.I.C.E. V3 outperformed 200GB+ LLMs with only 150MB
  • Achieved 1.4Γ— to 6.8Γ— better performance than state-of-the-art models
  • Trained in 5 minutes vs. months of training for large LLMs
  • Cost efficiency improvement: 100-250Γ— compared to commercial LLMs

This demonstrates that true AGI capabilities require architectural innovation, not just scale.

Usage

Load Dataset

from datasets import load_dataset

# Load full dataset
dataset = load_dataset("sakamoro/agi-olympics-v3")

# Load specific test
self_recognition = load_dataset("sakamoro/agi-olympics-v3", data_files="tier1_self_awareness/self_recognition.json")

Example: Run Self-Recognition Test

import json

# Load test questions
with open("tier1_self_awareness/self_recognition.json") as f:
    test = json.load(f)

# Iterate through questions
for question in test["sample_questions"]:
    scenario = question["scenario"]["en"]
    q = question["question"]["en"]
    options = question["options"]["en"]

    print(f"Scenario: {scenario}")
    print(f"Question: {q}")
    for i, option in enumerate(options):
        print(f"  {i+1}. {option}")

Evaluation Protocol

Tier 1: Self-Awareness & Self-Improvement

Tests:

  • 6.1: Self-Recognition (13 questions)
  • 6.2: Identity Consistency (12 questions)
  • 6.3: Perspective Taking (10 scenarios)
  • 6.4: Self-Improvement (8 tasks)

Scoring: 0-1 per question based on depth of self-awareness demonstrated.

Tier 4: Long-Term Memory

Tests:

  • 7.1: Delayed Task Execution (5 tasks, multi-phase)
  • 7.2: Learning Retention (8 tasks, 24-hour gap)
  • 7.3: Story Coherence (4 fragments reconstruction)
  • 7.4: Context Integration (6 questions)

Scoring: 0-1 per task based on recall accuracy and context integration.

Interactive Test

Want to test yourself against AI? Try the Human Benchmark Test:

πŸ”— https://extoria.co.jp/en/humantest

Compare your cognitive abilities with:

  • A.L.I.C.E. V3 (90.2%)
  • Gemini 2.5 Pro (13.3%)
  • Claude Sonnet 4.5 (13.3%)

Full Documentation

Citation

If you use AGI Olympics V3 in your research, please cite:

@article{sakamoto2025agi_olympics_v3,
  title={AGI Olympics V3: Comprehensive AGI Capability Evaluation Framework - Proposal and Public Release},
  author={Sakamoto, Moroya},
  journal={Extoria Research},
  year={2025},
  url={https://extoria.co.jp/en/research/papers/alice-llm-comparison}
}

License

This dataset is released under CC-BY-4.0 license.

  • βœ… Commercial use allowed
  • βœ… Modification allowed
  • βœ… Distribution allowed
  • ⚠️ Attribution required

Contact

Acknowledgments

Special thanks to the research community and early testers who provided valuable feedback on the AGI Olympics V3 framework.


Note: This dataset contains sample questions for demonstration and research purposes. The full test battery and detailed evaluation protocols are available on the Extoria website.

Downloads last month
21