Paper

WearableQA: A Benchmark for Health Reasoning over Real-World Wearable Data

Ji Soo Lee, Xilun Chen, Pierce Chuang, Ashish Shenoy, Jason Wei, Dohwan Ko +2 more
PreprintFirst posted: Sep 4, 2026Added to atlas: Oct 11, 2026Source
Citations—Not available
GitHub stars—Not available
HF downloads—Not available

Activity counts measure attention, not model quality. Missing counts are unknown. Publication status follows the linked source; a listed venue alone does not confirm peer review.

WearableQA is a benchmark of 4,084 ten-option questions built from the wearable data, blood biomarkers and demographics of 200 real users, each with up to 500 days of daily measurements. Its 16 question types separate data computation from health interpretation and single-signal from cross-signal reasoning. Across 14 LLMs, accuracy ranged from 19.6% to 72.9%, and most scored below 60%.

  • Result: Evaluation of 14 proprietary and open-source LLMs demonstrates that WearableQA effectively differentiates model capabilities, with performance ranging from 19.6% to 72.9% against a 10% chance baseline.
  • Result: WearableQA remains far from solved: most models achieve accuracies below 60%.
At a glance
Venue
arXiv preprint
Published
2026
DOI
Not reported
PMID
Not reported
Licence
Not reported
Form factor
Not reported
Subjects
Not reported
Code
Not reported
Added
Oct 11, 2026

Abstract

Recent advances in wearable sensing enable continuous monitoring of physiological and behavioral signals, yet existing benchmarks rarely evaluate whether AI systems can reason over a real user's longitudinal wearable record. We introduce WearableQA, a benchmark comprising 4,084 10-option multiple-choice questions constructed from the wearable time series, blood biomarkers, and demographics of 200 real users, each with up to 500 days of daily measurements. WearableQA preserves authentic wearable distributions that include device noise and inter-individual variability. To evaluate distinct reasoning capabilities, we introduce 16 question types organized along two complementary axes: data versus health reasoning, which distinguishes computation over longitudinal measurements from physiological interpretation; and single- versus cross-signal reasoning, which separates reasoning about individual signals from the integration of multiple signals. To construct reliable questions at scale, we adopt a dual-grounding framework that combines literature-grounded physiological findings with statistically validated population-grounded physiological patterns. This enables the capture of meaningful relationships observed in real-world wearable data. Evaluation of 14 proprietary and open-source LLMs demonstrates that WearableQA effectively differentiates model capabilities, with performance ranging from 19.6% to 72.9% against a 10% chance baseline. Moreover, WearableQA remains far from solved: most models achieve accuracies below 60%. Overall, WearableQA provides a realistic and diagnostic benchmark for evaluating LLM reasoning over real-world wearable data.

Verbatim fromarXiv· arXiv metadata (abstracts are released under CC0)

WearableQA: A Benchmark for Health Reasoning over Real-World Wearable Data: ChatPPG research summary card

How it works

How Method works: Setup → Method → ResultSetup: wearable daily metrics; blood biomarkers; Text (Language). Method: Method (Language-aligned). Result: Result (Evaluation of 14 proprietary and open-source LLMs demonstrates that WearableQA effectively differentiates model capabilities, with performance ranging from 19.6% to 72.9% against a 10% chance baseline.); Result (WearableQA remains far from solved: most models achieve accuracies below 60%.).Setupwearable daily metricswearable daily metricsblood biomarkersblood biomarkersText: LanguageTextLanguageMethodMethodLanguage-alignedResultResult: Evaluation of 14 proprietary and open-source LLMs demonstrates that WearableQA effectively differentiates model capabilities, with performance ranging from 19.6% to 72.9% against a 10% chance baseline.ResultEvaluation of 14 proprietary and…Result: WearableQA remains far from solved: most models achieve accuracies below 60%.ResultWearableQA remains far from solved…

Cite

@article{wearableqahealthreasonin2026,
  title = {{WearableQA: A Benchmark for Health Reasoning over Real-World Wearable Data}},
  author = {Ji Soo Lee and Xilun Chen and Pierce Chuang and Ashish Shenoy and Jason Wei and Dohwan Ko and Hyunwoo J. Kim and Benoit Corda},
  year = {2026},
  journal = {arXiv preprint},
  eprint = {2609.05405},
  url = {https://openreview.net/forum?id=wZEk6U3vds}
}

History

  1. Added to the ChatPPG research hub