Papers › Benchmarking Real-Time Question Answering via Executable Code Workflows

Benchmarking Real-Time Question Answering via Executable Code Workflows

16 Mar 2026arXiv:2604.16349added by Syntology

Wenjie Zhou, Yuan Gao, Xin Zhou, Hao Fu, Zhongjian Miao, Wei Chen, Bo Chen, Xiaobing Zhao

Title, abstract, authors and date from arXiv's metadata (CC0); this paper is not in the Papers with Code archive (frozen 2025-07-28).

Retrieving real-time information is a fundamental capability for search-integrated agents in real-world applications. However, existing benchmarks are predominantly static and therefore fail to capture the temporal dynamics of information and the continuously evolving nature of real-world knowledge. To address this limitation, we propose RT-QA, a dynamic evaluation framework that leverages executable code workflows to retrieve up-to-date answers at evaluation time. Specifically, we construct an agent-driven pipeline that autonomously generates code for web crawling and DOM-based answer extraction to produce real-time ground truth. To ensure robust evaluation over time, the pipeline further incorporates a self-repair mechanism to adapt to changes in web page structures. RT-QA spans 12 domains (e.g., Finance, Sports) with 320 Chinese questions categorized into three difficulty levels. Extensive evaluations of state-of-the-art models (e.g., GPT-5.2, GLM-4.7) reveal significant limitations in real-time adaptability: even the best models achieve only 46% accuracy. Our analysis highlights two primary failure modes: (1) Lazy Retrieval, where agents rely on search snippets instead of deeply scanning specific websites for information (20% of failures); and (2) Temporal Confusion, a cognitive error where agents retrieve a historical date (e.g., an event in 2024) and fail to re-anchor to the current time (2026) for subsequent reasoning. These findings suggest that future agents require not just better retrieval strategies, but robust temporal state management.

Code

Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

7 samples harvested; 0 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 7 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-24; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.

Licence: 7 of the 7 samples are pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.

Harvested from leaves-slient/RT-Bench. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.

Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.

Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.

Results from the paper

The Papers with Code archive ends with its 2025-07-28 snapshot. This paper's arXiv identifier, 2604.16349, was issued in April 2026, after that date, so the archive has no leaderboard rows for it.

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections