Papers › CityBench: Evaluating the Capabilities of Large Language Models for Urban Tasks
CityBench: Evaluating the Capabilities of Large Language Models for Urban Tasks
Jie Feng, Jun Zhang, Tianhui Liu, Xin Zhang, Tianjian Ouyang, Junbo Yan, Yuwei Du, Siqi Guo, Yong Li
Recently, large language models (LLMs) with extensive general knowledge and powerful reasoning abilities have seen rapid development and widespread application. A systematic and reliable evaluation of LLMs or vision-language model (VLMs) is a crucial step in applying and developing them for various fields. There have been some early explorations about the usability of LLMs for limited urban tasks, but a systematic and scalable evaluation benchmark is still lacking. The challenge in constructing a systematic evaluation benchmark for urban research lies in the diversity of urban data, the complexity of application scenarios and the highly dynamic nature of the urban environment. In this paper, we design CityBench, an interactive simulator based evaluation platform, as the first systematic benchmark for evaluating the capabilities of LLMs for diverse tasks in urban research. First, we build CityData to integrate the diverse urban data and CitySimu to simulate fine-grained urban dynamics. Based on CityData and CitySimu, we design 8 representative urban tasks in 2 categories of perception-understanding and decision-making as the CityBench. With extensive results from 30 well-known LLMs and VLMs in 13 cities around the world, we find that advanced LLMs and VLMs can achieve competitive performance in diverse urban tasks requiring commonsense and semantic understanding abilities, e.g., understanding the human dynamics and semantic inference of urban images. Meanwhile, they fail to solve the challenging urban tasks requiring professional knowledge and high-level reasoning abilities, e.g., geospatial prediction and traffic control task. These observations provide valuable perspectives for utilizing and developing LLMs in the future. Codes are openly accessible via https://github.com/tsinghua-fib-lab/CityBench.
In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.
For agents, Syntology's MCP tool lists every function and class Syntology harvested from this paper and whether it ran (how to connect): get_harvested_code_for_paper(arxiv_id="2406.13945")
Code
Syntology Ran 17 of 23 code samples harvested from 1 repository linked to this paper; 6 have no recorded run. Of those that ran: 1 ran · our draft was wrong; 16 ran with no contract checked.
By repository: official repository: 23 samples from 1 repository, 17 ran. The run record, sample by sample. “Ran” means executed on a synthesized input, not that the code is correct or reproduces the paper.
Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. 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
23 samples harvested; 17 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 6 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: 0 of the 23 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 tsinghua-fib-lab/citybench. “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.
ed0baa8be5a2be8e · report
3dd52b32d8265d75 · report
afe3f93eb4daddb2 · report
fbde55d407dfbc1f · report
6011c01be1bc239c · report
9745e19e1e4d5474 · report
901473d434f03b50 · report
00ff8bb07bb6500f · report
cd1e4cb179726aa5 · report
bdfec11b2815eede · report
aafdf0d32c0ac451 · report
7a47bc523075e6d4 · report
5642b97cf4bef5f0 · report
d45560a97cfd6154 · report
4189bccf9c32f695 · report
9b36c7f6d6007d25 · report
e67cb36ee1894010 · report
673d2b1bf01f10aa · report
17a3a8f86db336ac · report
3205b9f39f5f2e0c · report
74042dda0a06339b · report
a9cc1853676c97f4 · report
8b39129551bb06a0 · report
Tasks
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.
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