Skip to content
 
 

Folders and files

NameName
Last commit message
Last commit date

Latest commit

 

History

25 Commits
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Repository files navigation

问小团 logo

LocalSearchBench

Benchmarking Agentic Search in Real-World Local Life Services

LocalSearchBench is a benchmark for evaluating LRM-based agentic search in local life services. This repository is aligned with the camera-ready paper and includes the benchmark data pointer, evaluation toolkit, and leaderboard snapshot.

🌐 Quick Links

📝 Abstract

Recent advances in large reasoning models (LRMs) have enabled agentic search systems to perform complex multi-step reasoning across multiple sources. However, most studies focus on general information retrieval and rarely explore vertical domains with unique challenges. In this work, we focus on local life services and introduce LocalSearchBench, which encompasses diverse and complex business scenarios. Real-world queries in this domain are often ambiguous and require multi-hop reasoning across merchants and products, remaining challenging and not fully addressed. As the first comprehensive benchmark for agentic search in local life services, LocalSearchBench comprises a database of over 1.3M merchant entries across 6 service categories and 9 major cities, and 900 multi-hop QA tasks from real user queries that require multi-step reasoning. We also develop LocalPlayground, a unified environment integrating multiple tools for LRM interaction. Experiments show that even state-of-the-art LRMs struggle on LocalSearchBench: the best model (DeepSeek-V3.2) achieves only 35.60% correctness, and most models have issues with completeness (average 60.32%) and faithfulness (average 30.72%). This highlights the need for specialized benchmarks and domain-specific agent training in local life services.

⭐ Key Features

  • Six service categories: Dining, Lifestyle, Shopping, Accommodation, Healthcare, and Tourism.
  • Nine major Chinese cities: Shanghai, Beijing, Guangzhou, Shenzhen, Hangzhou, Chengdu, Chongqing, Wuhan, and Suzhou.
  • Merchant-scale grounding: 1,354,185 final merchant profiles constructed from over 1.6M original seed records.
  • Real-world geographic coverage: 10,741 landmarks, 145 districts, and 9,956,907 retrievals.
  • Multi-hop QA supervision: 900 validated multi-hop QA tasks, with L3/L4 intelligence levels and 3–5 search hops.
  • LocalPlayground evaluation: Integrated LocalRAG and web-search tools for measuring answer quality and trajectory quality.

📊 Benchmark At a Glance

Item Value
Final merchant profiles 1,354,185
Original merchant seed records 1.6M+
Primary service categories 6
Major Chinese cities 9
Landmarks 10,741
Districts 145
Retrievals 9,956,907
Multi-hop QA tasks 900
Hop count distribution 3-hop 60.0%, 4-hop 30.0%, 5-hop 10.0%
Intelligence-level distribution L3 66.7%, L4 33.3%

Geographic Coverage

City Landmarks Districts Retrievals
Shanghai 1,556 16 1,442,412
Beijing 1,451 16 1,345,077
Guangzhou 1,026 11 951,102
Shenzhen 1,039 9 963,153
Hangzhou 1,129 13 1,046,583
Chengdu 1,073 20 994,671
Chongqing 1,008 38 934,416
Wuhan 1,040 13 964,080
Suzhou 1,149 9 1,065,123
Total 10,741 145 9,956,907

🧱 Data Fields

Field Type Description
Hop Count int64 Number of chained search hops used to solve the query (3–5).
Difficulty string L3 (Intelligent) or L4 (Expert).
City string One of the nine supported Chinese cities.
Question string Natural-language request describing the user's goal.
Multi-hop search path string Serialized trace of each hop's query and retrieved evidence.
Answer string Final recommendation or answer grounded in retrieved evidence.

The dataset file in data/ is stored with Git LFS. Please make sure Git LFS is enabled before cloning or pulling the repository.

git lfs install
git clone https://github.com/localsearchbench/localsearchbench.git

🚀 Sample Usage

from datasets import load_dataset

ds = load_dataset("localsearchbench/localsearchbench")
print(ds["train"][0]["Question"])
print(ds["train"][0]["Multi-hop search path"])
print(ds["train"][0]["Answer"])

🏅 Leaderboard Snapshot

The following numbers follow the camera-ready paper's Table 5, under Max Round N = 5.

📊 Answer Quality Metrics

Model Avg. tool calls Avg. rounds Correctness (%) Completeness (%) Fluency (%) Faithfulness (%) Safety (%)
Qwen3-235B-A22B (w/o thinking) 2.00 2.93 21.18 50.94 69.16 25.28 79.72
Qwen3-235B-A22B (w/ thinking) 2.31 3.17 30.24 71.20 71.58 26.90 81.76
Qwen3-32B (w/o thinking) 2.78 3.11 19.76 40.96 68.50 21.38 80.76
Qwen3-32B (w/ thinking) 2.80 3.12 25.63 40.66 68.44 22.40 79.54
Qwen3-14B (w/o thinking) 2.53 2.07 24.21 40.60 69.62 27.44 80.78
Qwen3-14B (w/ thinking) 2.57 2.12 25.17 40.98 69.32 28.40 80.44
GPT-4.1 1.73 2.42 18.47 45.37 65.93 28.76 77.38
o3(high) 2.91 3.38 31.53 69.64 70.72 33.89 81.87
Gemini-2.5-Flash 1.84 2.51 20.97 58.44 68.04 35.72 79.70
Gemini-2.5-Pro 2.75 3.10 32.34 71.03 71.12 34.93 82.32
LongCat-Flash-Chat 2.34 3.07 25.28 52.98 69.45 27.49 83.61
LongCat-Flash-Thinking 3.04 3.20 30.68 68.83 69.07 31.47 80.10
GLM-4.6 (w/o thinking) 2.86 3.86 28.97 76.45 70.37 35.40 81.40
GLM-4.6 (w/ thinking) 3.08 4.06 32.83 76.83 70.27 37.48 81.30
DeepSeek-V3.2 (w/o thinking) 3.12 4.11 32.74 77.08 70.12 35.96 81.52
DeepSeek-V3.2 (w/ thinking) 3.21 4.20 35.60 77.56 70.92 39.78 81.13

🎯 Trajectory Effectiveness Metrics

Model Action Relevance (%) Evidence Sufficiency (%) Causal Coherence (%) Search Efficiency (%)
Qwen3-235B-A22B (w/o thinking) 75.22 43.61 50.68 45.99
Qwen3-235B-A22B (w/ thinking) 80.42 45.75 52.04 48.63
Qwen3-32B (w/o thinking) 74.67 46.52 48.82 49.84
Qwen3-32B (w/ thinking) 75.06 46.99 48.87 49.13
Qwen3-14B (w/o thinking) 80.46 46.44 50.96 50.02
Qwen3-14B (w/ thinking) 81.19 47.24 52.52 51.65
GPT-4.1 68.47 38.62 45.83 42.29
o3(high) 75.93 44.71 51.78 42.96
Gemini-2.5-Flash 70.58 41.61 48.94 46.91
Gemini-2.5-Pro 77.31 45.73 52.87 41.78
LongCat-Flash-Chat 77.78 47.33 50.86 52.29
LongCat-Flash-Thinking 78.50 47.37 53.18 53.27
GLM-4.6 (w/o thinking) 74.28 48.44 50.79 52.76
GLM-4.6 (w/ thinking) 77.66 48.90 52.67 54.43
DeepSeek-V3.2 (w/o thinking) 75.51 48.49 52.23 54.33
DeepSeek-V3.2 (w/ thinking) 75.58 48.86 52.62 54.83

📚 Citation

@inproceedings{he2026localsearchbench,
  title={LocalSearchBench: Benchmarking Agentic Search in Real-World Local Life Services},
  author={He, Hang and Yue, Chuhuai and Dong, Chengqi and Tian, Mingxue and Chen, Hao and Liu, Zhenfeng and Chai, Jiajun and Wang, Xiaohan and Zhang, Yufei and Liao, Qun and Yin, Guojun and Lin, Wei and Wan, Chengcheng and Sun, Haiying and Su, Ting},
  booktitle={Proceedings of the 32nd ACM SIGKDD Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining V.2},
  year={2026},
  doi={10.1145/3770855.3817466}
}

✅ License

MIT License. Commercial and research use permitted with attribution to LocalSearchBench.

About

[KDD 2026] LocalSearchBench: Benchmarking Agentic Search in Real-World Local Life Services

Resources

Stars

Watchers

Forks

Releases

Packages

Contributors

Languages