Datasets  /  CLE

Dataset · CLE

Continual Learning Exam

102 human-authored persona ladders across 14 occupational domains. Every ladder gates its levels behind the one before it — so an agent reaches the last level only by holding on to the artefacts, terminology and constraints it established in the first.

Paper GitHub Data samples

Overview

102Task laddershuman-authored, one persona each
509Graded levelsfive per ladder; one ladder has four
14Occupational domainsin five families
13.7%Largest domain shareno single domain dominates

What CLE measures

Most agent benchmarks ask for one artefact and score it. A working professional never gets that: the second request assumes the first one's output, the fourth assumes a vocabulary nobody restated. CLE is built around that dependency. Each ladder is a single persona's workday, cut into gated levels — the level's inputs are the previous level's outputs, and a run stops at the first level that fails. Reaching level 4 is therefore evidence that the agent carried context forward, not that it got a lucky draw.

Ladders were authored by domain practitioners, and the rubric is hidden from the solver: the agent sees the task brief, while grading runs off a checklist the agent never reads — file existence, structural correctness, exact key fields, source and anchor verification, and explicit negative checks. Domains were assigned by reading each ladder end to end rather than from author-declared labels, and clustered by the competence and artefact type they exercise, so ladders that share an industry but not a skill set — RTL verification and grid load forecasting, say — stay separate.

Domain composition

Task ladders by occupational domain — 14 domains in 5 families, n = 102
102 task ladders 14 domains · 5 families

Family sets the hue; every domain is named in the legend with its own count and share, so identity never rests on colour alone. Shares are of all 102 ladders.

What one graded level contains

1 · Task brief

What the solver sees: Inputs, Output, Format Requirements, Constraints. Written as a colleague would hand it over — the deliverable path is exact, the reasoning is not spelled out.

2 · Hidden rubric

The full checklist, withheld from the solver: file existence, structure, key-field exactness, source & anchor verification, negative checks, plus grading notes on what does not earn credit.

3 · Item-level verdict

Every rubric line scored individually with the evidence quoted, then summed to a level score and a PASS/FAIL gate. Attempt count is kept.

4 · Full trajectory

The complete actor run for the graded attempt — reasoning, tool calls, tool output, messages — typically 40–130 segments per level. Nothing is summarised away.

The dataset is model-agnostic: task briefs, linked workspaces and hidden rubrics are the core artefacts. The previews below focus on the case design and verification pressure points rather than a particular model run.

Data samples

task165.html156.0 KB
Open in new tab ↗

Three curated cases from the public dataset, selected for narrative clarity, cross-domain breadth and visual demo value. Each preview shows the five linked tasks, representative evidence, machine-checkable outputs and evaluation pressure points.

Citation

@misc{cle2026,
  title  = {{CLE}: A Continual Learning Exam for Agents},
  author = {Memento},
  year   = {2026},
  note   = {https://memento.run/products/data/cle/}
}

TODO — swap in the real author list, venue and arXiv id before release.