Automated Evaluation

Follow this topic Ask about this topic

Momentum

48 papers in the last four weeks, up 12% on the four weeks before. 0.3% of all new papers.

Jul 13Week of Sep 28

Latest papers 321

Aug 14, 2026cs.LG

WANDR: A Benchmark for Wide and Deep Research

WANDR (Wide ANd Deep Research) is a benchmark of 500 realistic, challenging data-collection tasks for research agents. Each task requires a system to discover a large set of entities that satisfy specified criteria (breadth), investigate each entity through multiple coordinated web searches (depth), and return independently verifiable records with supporting sources and excerpts. Tasks are represented as qualification key hierarchies that specify the entities, relationships, evidence, and required count at each level; a hierarchy with n companies, m employees per company, and k sources per employee requires n x m x k records. This structure supports diverse workflows such as market mapping, due diligence, literature review, product comparison, and talent sourcing, with targets ranging from dozens to thousands of records. WANDR replaces static gold answer sets with task-specific judges that refetch cited pages and verify each record against its evidence, allowing evaluation of current and changing facts. Record verdicts are aggregated into soft and hard precision, recall, and F1 scores that distinguish factual quality, coverage, and hierarchical completeness. The tasks are derived from de-identified product-usage logs and produced through a semi-automated pipeline with automated checks, empirical audits, and human review where needed. We evaluate six production research systems and find that the benchmark is far from saturated: at high effort, the strongest system reaches only 0.363 soft F1 and 0.133 hard F1. Performance degrades as target volume and hierarchy depth increase, with incomplete discovery, missing enrichment, and incomplete evidence construction remaining major bottlenecks. The benchmark and evaluation harness are available at https://github.com/perplexityai/wandr.

Vitaliy Polshkov, Marcin Pitera, Jeremy Yang +7

AI Agent Benchmarks Deep Research Agents Automated Evaluation

Aug 13, 2026cs.AI

RAIL: An Automatic Classifier of the Artificial Intelligence Readiness Level

Assessing the maturity of artificial intelligence technologies is essential for investment decisions, project management, and policy monitoring, yet the available readiness frameworks are heterogeneous and difficult to apply automatically: the adaptation of Technology Readiness Levels to AI lacks AI-specific gating criteria, the Machine Learning Technology Readiness Levels presuppose access to internal process artifacts, and AI/data readiness dimension models employ scales that resist direct comparison. This paper makes two contributions. First, we unify these three frameworks into the Unified AI Readiness Level (AIRL), a nine-level ordinal scale built on an environmental evidence ladder and complemented by dimensional caps (covering specification, data existence, data quality, data legality, expert knowledge, and algorithmic maturity) together with a generality-anchoring rule and explicit assignment disciplines, so that a readiness level becomes decidable from a natural-language description of the work alone. Second, we propose RAIL (Readiness Assessment via Independent LLM-experts), a panel-of-experts classifier that operationalizes the scale: one evidence agent and six independent dimension agents, each a large language model with a narrowly scoped mandate, deliver verdicts that a deterministic minimum rule aggregates and a chief expert reviews under asymmetric authority, confirming or lowering the panel's recommendation but never raising it above the caps. The method was tested in the analysis of several research works showing consistency and avoiding overestimation from monolithic LLM classifiers.

Juan Irving Vasquez, Juan Terven, Laura-Ivoone Garay-Jimenez

CIETEC-IPN Instituto Polit´ecnico Nacional M´exico City, M´exico · Instituto Polit´ecnico Nacional, UPIITA, M´exico City, M´exico

Automated Evaluation

Aug 13, 2026cs.CL

LigBench: A Unified and Human-Aligned Benchmark for LLM-based Research Idea Generation

With the rapid advancement of large language models (LLMs), research idea generation has attracted increasing attention. Existing approaches enable LLMs to retrieve relevant literature and propose novel ideas for research areas. However, current evaluation practices for idea generation remain fragmented and lack objective standards, often relying on direct LLM scoring, which limits their ability to provide unified and reliable assessments across a coherent distribution of generated ideas. To address this challenge, we propose LigBench, an automated evaluation benchmark that enables fine-grained and reliable evaluation of AI research ideas, consistently applicable across different generation distributions. In addition, we introduce PAIR-IQ, a dataset tailored for training pairwise idea judgment models and serving as an auxiliary reference to support more objective comparative evaluation. Extensive experiments demonstrate that LigBench achieves stable and interpretable evaluations, significantly improving alignment with expert judgments. Furthermore, models trained on PAIR-IQ exhibit enhanced ranking accuracy and robustness, establishing a principled standard for scalable and objective research idea assessment.

Chenrun Wang, Mingxuan Zhu, Tiancheng Huang +6

1X-LANCE Lab, School of Computer Science, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China · 2Shanghai Innovation Institution, Shanghai, China

LLM Evaluation Benchmark Design Research Idea Generation Automated Evaluation

Aug 13, 2026cs.CL

CASA: Content-Acoustic Speaking Assessment with Speech Encoder and Large Language Model

Research on automatic speaking assessment (ASA) has increasingly adopted multimodal speech large language models to assess learners' speaking performance. However, existing studies provide limited analysis of how acoustic and content information contribute to predictions and how stable the resulting performance is. We propose CASA, a simpler architecture combining Whisper-medium and Qwen3.5-2B that achieves state-of-the-art performance while providing a more interpretable separation between speech delivery and content. On the Speak & Improve Corpus 2025, CASA achieves a root mean square error (RMSE) of 0.358, improving on the previous best RMSE while using approximately half the estimated inference parameters. The general-purpose architecture is designed for adaptation to other ASA corpora without structural changes and relies on three handcrafted fluency features. Through ablations and repeated runs, we analyze the individual and complementary contributions of acoustic and content information, examine performance variability, and demonstrate the potential of large language model reasoning for training-free content validation.

Nhan Phan, Ilona Lähteenmäki, Anna von Zansen +4

Department of Information and Communications Engineering, Aalto University, Espoo, Finland · Department of Education, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland · Programmable Autonomous Systems Division, Walton Institute, Waterford, Ireland

Automated Evaluation Speech Language Models

Aug 13, 2026cs.AI

ARAC: Benchmarking Auto-Research's Alignment and Completeness on End-to-End Researchs

The rapid advancement of Auto-Research has surfaced a fundamental evaluation challenge: how can we measure the alignment, logical coherence, and evolutionary completeness of its research trajectory with human research behavior? We propose Auto-Research's Alignment and Completeness, ARAC-Bench: a Researcher-Mimicking Evaluation framework that shifts the objective from matching final answers to reproducing high-quality human research processes. The framework operates through two synergistic components: the Academic Cognition Skills system, which is the first to transforms implicit reviewer expertise into stage-calibrated, quantifiable rubrics; and a three-stage capability diagnostic protocol, which decomposes the research process under strict modular constraints into three traceable, mutually independent dimensions: Proposal, Experiment, and Synthesis. Systematic evaluation of 11 SOTA frameworks yields a best alignment score of only 67.9 of 100, revealing a significant gap in simulating rigorous human methodology. Validation against Ph.D. Candidates rankings shows a strong correlation of 0.8141, confirming that ARAC-Bench reliably reflects the dimensions researchers truly value. ARAC-Bench provides not only a fine-grained diagnostic tool but also a scalable reward signal for training the next generation of autonomous research systems.

Jiale Cui, Yueyao Yuan, Kaixi Zhong +3

School of Software Technology, Zhejiang University

Human Preference Evaluation AI Agent Benchmarks Automated Evaluation Autonomous Research Agents

Aug 11, 2026cs.CV

TangPoetryBench: A Multi-Dimensional Benchmark and Rubric-Conditioned Evaluator for Poetry-to-Image Generation

Text-to-image (T2I) models are increasingly asked to illustrate literary and cultural content, yet we cannot measure how well an image renders the meaning of a poem. The task is many-sided: a good illustration must be visually sound, faithful to the poem's imagery and scene, culturally and stylistically apt, free of spurious text, and true to its emotion, and its deepest requirements, imagery and especially implicit emotion, are never stated in the words. Existing metrics (CLIPScore, BLIPScore, VQAScore) reward literal text-image correspondence and so cannot tell whether an illustration succeeds, let alone why, or even separate the best model from the worst. We introduce TangPoetryBench, a multi-dimensional benchmark of 1,280 images (320 classical Chinese Tang poems x 4 state-of-the-art T2I models) with quality-controlled human annotations across ten dimensions. Analyzing this data, we reveal the shared and model-specific strengths and weaknesses of current T2I models, including their ability to evoke a poem's implicit emotion. We further introduce PoemAutoEvaluator (PAE), an open, rubric-conditioned evaluator that reaches parity with a strong proprietary judge (Claude), generalizes to an unseen generator and a second poetic tradition (Song Ci), and lets the benchmark scale to new images without fresh human annotation. We release the benchmark, annotations, and evaluator.

Haoqi Hu, Tongji Luo, Li Zhang +1

Independent Researcher

Image Generation Automated Evaluation T2I Generation Evaluation

Aug 11, 2026cs.AI

HexEval: An Evidence-Driven Hexagonal Framework for Multidimensional Scholar Assessment

Scholar assessment plays a fundamental role in faculty recruitment, funding allocation, academic promotion, and talent discovery. Existing scholar assessment methods predominantly rely on bibliometric indicators and reputation proxies, while recent large language model (LLM)-based approaches mainly focus on evaluating individual research papers rather than comprehensively assessing scholars. We argue that scholar assessment should be formulated as an evidence-driven reasoning problem that jointly considers intrinsic research quality and externally verifiable scholarly behavior. To this end, we propose HexEval, an evidence-driven hexagonal framework for multidimensional scholar assessment. HexEval explicitly organizes scholar assessment into two complementary evidence layers. The intrinsic layer evaluates anonymized representative works along three dimensions, namely research rigor, methodological innovation, and scientific contribution, whereas the external layer characterizes scholars through knowledge translation, research coherence, and academic impact using heterogeneous evidence collected from GitHub, Lens, OpenAlex, and other publicly verifiable sources. Instead of producing opaque aggregate scores, HexEval preserves intermediate evidence, dimension-specific rationales, and verification signals throughout the evaluation process, enabling interpretable and auditable scholar profiles. Experiments across all six dimensions show dimension-dependent agreement with human or external reference criteria: structured calibration improves absolute agreement for intrinsic quality, while the external modules recover broad trajectory and ordinal impact signals. These results support evidence-driven reasoning over heterogeneous scholarly evidence as a promising paradigm for auditable AI-assisted scholar assessment, while exposing the coverage and attribution limitations of public scholarly data.

Xiaokang Qu, Yiting Lin

School of Cyber Science and Technology, University of Science and Technology of China Hefei, Anhui, China

Automated Evaluation

Aug 11, 2026cs.CV

FormStruct-Bench:A Hierarchical and Diagnostic Benchmark for Table-Form Document Structure Recognition

Transforming table-form documents into machine-processable records requires recovering not only their visible content but also the multilevel structure that organizes it. However, existing benchmarks evaluate either holistic document outputs or conventional table grids, and their aggregate scores provide little insight into where structural failures occur. We introduce FormStruct-Bench, a hierarchical and diagnostic benchmark that evaluates table-form document structure recognition at both the document level and progressively finer component levels, allowing aggregate performance to be traced back to specific structural failure modes. To construct auditable ground truth at scale, we annotate 70 reusable templates and expand them into 7,000 verified instances through a provenance-preserving Director--Artist--Verifier pipeline; all 1,100 instances in the template-disjoint test set additionally receive human review. Our evaluation protocol uses five primary metrics and three structure-specific diagnostics across page, schema, and component levels, together with slices over difficulty, structural constraints, and visual degradation. Across 14 API-hosted and locally deployable systems plus two SFT variants, the best document-level score reaches 83.85%, whereas the best reported fine-grained structural score remains below 18%. These results reveal a pronounced gap between reading document content and recovering the hierarchy and regional organization required for reliable table-form understanding.

Lujie Ban, Jiangtao Zhu, Yuanheng Yu +2

The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shenzhen · University of Washington

Document Understanding Table Structure Recognition Benchmark Validity Document Layout Analysis Automated Evaluation

Aug 10, 2026cs.AI

RAVEN-Eval: Rubric-Guided Automatic Evaluation for AI Video Generation Models Based on LMM Preference Judgement

AI video generation has advanced rapidly and entered widespread commercial use. As a result, quality differences among videos produced by state-of-the-art AI video generation models~(AIVGMs) have become increasingly difficult to discern using conventional evaluation criteria, such as visual fidelity and semantic instruction following. Meanwhile, human evaluation now requires more expertise and sustained attention, substantially increasing annotation costs. This calls for automated evaluation that can reliably distinguish fine-grained differences among advanced AIVGMs with minimal human intervention. To address this challenge, we present RAVEN-Eval, a rubric-guided automated evaluation framework for AIVGMs, built primarily on the LMM-as-a-judge paradigm. Through an automatic task curation and quality-filtering pipeline, RAVEN-Eval curates 150 text-to-video~(T2V) tasks and 100 image-to-video~(I2V) tasks, and systematically collects more than 4,500 AIGVs. At its core, RAVEN-Eval adopts rubric-guided automated LMM preference judgement, in which LMM judges conduct pairwise comparisons according to task-specific rubrics. It further introduces an anchor-based model insertion approach to reduce the evaluation cost of incorporating new models. Finally, we evaluate 20 high-performance AIVGMs, as well as the judging capabilities of 13 LMM judges, and establish the RAVEN-Eval Leaderboards. Overall, RAVEN-Eval paves a scalable path for automatic and trustworthy evaluation of rapidly evolving AIVGMs.

Ziheng Jia, Jiaying Qian, Zicheng Zhang +3

Shanghai Jiao Tong University · Shanghai Artificial Intelligence Laboratory

LLM-as-a-Judge Rubric-Based Evaluation Automated Evaluation Video Generation Evaluation

Aug 8, 2026cs.AI

Janus: An Algorithm-Evaluator Co-Evolution Framework for LLM-Driven Discovery under Expensive Evaluation Budgets

LLM-driven program discovery relies on rapid evaluator feedback, but many scientific and engineering tasks require high-fidelity simulations, hardware execution, or physical experiments, making each evaluation expensive. Cheap surrogate evaluators can reduce this cost, yet fixed surrogates are vulnerable to search-induced distribution shift and are difficult to fit reliably from sparse, search-biased labels. We introduce Janus, a framework that uses LLMs to co-evolve target programs and executable proxy evaluators. To address label scarcity, Janus leverages domain knowledge encoded in LLMs to generate task-specific evaluator programs and calibrates them using real outcomes. To mitigate distribution shift, Janus evolves evaluators alongside target programs, selects them using a promotion-aligned objective, and maintains region-conditioned portfolios with online credit updates. Because proxy predictions remain fallible, Janus uses them only to prioritize candidates and requires real validation before candidates can enter the target-program population or update the incumbent. Across five scientific and engineering design tasks, Janus achieves a larger area under the best-so-far improvement curve over the real-evaluation budget and higher final performance than a matched baseline that evolves only target programs. On average, Janus reaches 99/% of the baseline's final improvement with 59.1/% fewer real evaluations. Evolved proxy evaluators also rank promising candidates more accurately than their seed versions. Together, these results extend evaluator-guided LLM discovery from tasks with cheap, scalable feedback to scientific domains where trustworthy evaluation is scarce and expensive.

Ximeng Liu, Qianlong Wang, Yingming Mao +6

Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China · Baidu Inc., Beijing, China · Xi’an Jiaotong University, Xi’an, China +1

Surrogate-Assisted Optimization Large Language Model-Guided Optimization LLM-Based Program Synthesis Automated Evaluation Large Language Model-Guided Scientific Discovery

Aug 7, 2026cs.CL

SurveyReview: A Reviewer-Aligned Benchmark for Survey Evaluators

The rapid advancement of large language models has transformed survey writing from a months-long manual effort into an automated process. As generation scales, reliable evaluation becomes the bottleneck, and LLMs are increasingly used as survey evaluators. However, existing approaches largely rely on off-the-shelf LLM-as-a-judge methods without systematic alignment to human reviewers, and there remains a lack of systematic frameworks for quantifying alignment with human reviewers. To address this gap, we propose SurveyReview, a reviewer-aligned, multi-dimensional benchmark and dataset for survey evaluation. We collect and annotate 675 survey papers with 1,630 review reports. We structure authentic peer-review reports by converting free-form comments into four-dimensional scores (Readability, Criticalness, Comprehensiveness, Structure) paired with supporting rationales. We further release standardized train/test splits and an evaluation protocol to measure alignment between automatic evaluators and human reviewers. To validate the benchmark, we develop SurveyAlign, a strong baseline evaluator by fine-tuning Qwen3-32B with LoRA on our annotated data, augmented with external knowledge for knowledge-intensive dimensions. On the test set, SurveyAlign substantially improves reviewer alignment over prompt-based judging with GPT-5.2, reducing average MSE from 2.28 to 1.38 and MAE from 1.15 to 0.69 across all four dimensions. Our contributions are twofold: (1) we establish the first multi-dimensional, reviewer-aligned dataset with a reproducible evaluation framework for survey reviewing; (2) we develop a strong baseline evaluator that substantially improves alignment with human reviewers, providing a competitive reference for future research. Our code and data are available at https://surveyreview.github.io

Yuheng Zhang, Yuanchun Wang, Fanjin Zhang +4

School of Information Renmin University of China Beijing, China · Key Laboratory of Data Engineering and Knowledge Engineering Beijing, China · Engineering Research Center of Database and Business Intelligence Beijing, China +1

LLM-as-a-Judge Automated Evaluation Automated Peer Review

Aug 7, 2026cs.AI

Winning by Peeking: Unenforced Budgets and Test-Set Selection Inflate Short-Budget AutoML Comparisons

Comparisons between AutoML systems at short time budgets -- tens of seconds rather than hours -- are common in tool READMEs and workshop papers, and they are easy to get wrong. We report a case study in which a simple AutoML engine, Orcetra, appeared to beat FLAML and AutoGluon on 513 OpenML datasets, winning 57.1% of them at a nominal 60-second budget and 78.4% of datasets against FLAML alone at 30 seconds. Both margins came from protocol defects that a results table cannot show. The search loop scored every candidate on the test split and reported the best, making the headline metric a maximum over dozens of noisy estimates while the baselines selected on training data and touched the test set once; and the budget was checked before launching a candidate but never enforced during one, so the system consumed a median of 120 s against a 60-second budget, 2.24x the wall-clock AutoGluon used. Re-running with selection moved to a validation split, the deadline enforced externally and every framework pinned to an equal share of the machine, Orcetra's win rate on the re-run subset falls from 59.4% to 34.3% and no pairwise difference against either competitor remains significant. Recording both estimands inside a single search lets us attribute the collapse: the selection rule accounts for 4.8 percentage points and unequal compute for most of the rest. The same traces give the selection bias as a function of budget, measured rather than assumed: it grows with

K

but reaches only 0.27 accuracy points, about five times below the

σ\sqrt{2\ln K}

bound a marginal-standard-error argument predicts, because candidates scored on shared test rows cancel most of the noise. We close with a checklist for short-budget comparisons. Code, per-dataset results and the scripts that regenerate every number and figure in the paper are released with it.

Guilin Zhang, Kai Zhao

Independent Researcher

Benchmark Auditing Automated Evaluation Automated Machine Learning

Aug 7, 2026cs.SE

Beyond Text Matching: Towards Reference-Free Evaluation for Human-Oriented Binary Reverse Engineering

Human-Oriented Binary Reverse Engineering (HOBRE) aims to transform decompiled pseudocode into a more human-friendly representation, thereby reducing the cognitive burden of reverse analysis and improving efficiency. However, reliably evaluating HOBRE outputs remains a fundamental challenge: human evaluation is costly, time-consuming, and difficult to scale, while existing automated metrics either require executable test cases and runtime environments that are often unavailable for real-world binaries, or rely on high-quality source code references that are typically inaccessible and fail to capture semantically equivalent but lexically diverse outputs. Although LLM-as-a-Judge paradigm is naturally well-suited to HOBRE evaluation, its effectiveness remains underexplored. This paper presents the first systematic investigation of the LLM-as-a-Judge paradigm for HOBRE across three representative tasks: function name recovery, binary code summarization, and decompilation optimization. We introduce BinJudgeBench, the first expert-annotated, reference-free evaluation benchmark based on multi-dimensional human judgment, where LLM-as-a-Judge achieves an average correlation of 63.20% with human judgment, outperforming traditional automated metrics at 35.04%. By analyzing judge configurations across backbone LLMs, prompting strategies, and decoding temperatures, we find that no ``one-size-fits-all'' configuration exists, as the optimal setup varies across tasks and individual samples. To address this, we propose BinJudge, which employs a lightweight routing mechanism to adaptively select the optimal judge configuration for each task and sample. BinJudge improves correlation with human experts by 4.5%-24.7% and reduces API cost to 0.06

\times

-0.84

\times

of that of static best configurations, providing a scalable, cost-effective, and high-fidelity automated evaluation scheme for HOBRE.

Xiuwei Shang, Li Hu, Xiao Jiang +7

University of Science and Technology of China Hefei, China · Singapore Management University Singapore · University of Alberta & Alberta Machine Intelligence Institute Edmonton, Canada +1

LLM-as-a-Judge Software Reverse Engineering Reference-Free Evaluation Automated Evaluation

Aug 7, 2026cs.CV

AVCap: Reinforcing Audio-Video Joint Caption with Detail-Aware Reward

Detailed audio-video joint captioning is essential for multimodal video understanding and generation. However, prior works are constrained by three main limitations: (1) the scarcity of high-quality public datasets with fine-grained audio-visual joint captions; (2) reinforcement-learning methods that rely on coarse reward signals; and (3) the lack of a benchmark and metric for evaluating detailed audiovisual captions at the atomic level. To address these challenges, we propose: (1) AVCap-100K, a high-quality dataset of 100K temporally aligned, detail-rich audio-video captions; (2) AVCap, a model optimized via Detail-Aware GRPO (Da-GRPO) that achieves state-of-the-art performance among open-source models and matches or surpasses proprietary models on several evaluations; and (3) AVCap-Bench and AVCap-Score, a specialized benchmark and metric for evaluating atomic-level details in audiovisual captions. Our code, models, and datasets are available at https://huggingface.co/collections/Apryle/avcap.

Mingyang Wu, Kaituo Feng, Bohao Li +3

MMLab, CUHK · Peking University

Audio-Visual Understanding Group Relative Policy Optimization Audio-Visual Alignment Automated Evaluation

Aug 7, 2026cs.AI

SkillEval: Decomposing Agent Skill Quality into Interpretable Signals

Agent skills provide reusable procedural knowledge that helps agents solve specialized tasks. As their use expands, evaluating skill quality becomes increasingly important. Existing evaluations often measure skill quality by testing whether a skill improves performance on specific downstream tasks. However, a reusable skill may apply to multiple task scenarios. Downstream evaluation mainly reflects the compatibility between a skill and the evaluated task, provides only a partial view of skill quality, and does not identify which aspect of the skill should be improved. We find that general properties of the \texttt{SKILL.md} document play an important role in skill quality. To evaluate these properties, we propose \textbf{SkillEval}, an interpretable framework for document-level skill evaluation. SkillEval evaluates each property using a fixed and inspectable scoring direction, producing interpretable scores. It further measures and reduces the influence of unrelated document features, such as length and formatting, so that each score captures its intended semantic property more specifically. Specifically, SkillEval learns an interpretable direction for each quality property from controlled positive--negative skill pairs in the hidden representation space of the model, and scores a new skill by projecting its representation onto these fixed directions. We use SkillEval to evaluate skills in controlled quality tests and show that SkillEval reliably distinguishes skills of different quality. In addition, SkillEval scores closely reflect downstream task performance, providing an early indication of whether a skill is likely to help an agent complete a task. We further explore SkillEval for diagnosing weaknesses in skill documents and guiding targeted revisions. The revised skills improve the targeted properties and achieve higher pass rates on downstream tasks.

Jiahui Han, Qinuo Li, Ziheng Peng +6

1Xi’an Jiaotong University · 2Shanghai AI Laboratory · 5Harbin Institute of Technology +2

LLM Agent Evaluation Automated Evaluation

Aug 6, 2026cs.AI

Automated item evaluation: Predicting item acceptance and rejection using LLM-generated critiques

Automated item evaluation (AIE) refers to the use of computational methods to assess item quality without requiring manual expert review or field testing of the items under evaluation. We aimed to build a near-comprehensive AIE model by predicting item acceptance and rejection from item text using historical rejection data from a large-scale standardized testing program. The dataset contained 52,759 English language arts (ELA) and mathematics items with 34% permanently rejected from future operational use. Rejection reasons included poor psychometric properties, content issues, bias and sensitivity concerns, and non-content issues. We fine-tuned a DeBERTaV3-large classifier on raw item text, a second DeBERTa classifier on Qwen3-generated item critiques, and a fusion model combining representations from both. The fusion model achieved the strongest overall performance (Accuracy = .75, F1 = .64, AUC = .80, Sensitivity = .64, Specificity = .81). Prediction for math (F1 = .73, AUC = .86) was considerably more accurate than ELA (F1 = .51, AUC = .72). Lowering the decision threshold from .5 to .25 raised average sensitivity for ELA and math to .88 and .91, while reducing specificity to .31 and .56, respectively, which may be preferable in automated item generation contexts where generating items is cheaper than evaluating them. Incorporating item critiques alongside raw item text improved performance across most rejection reasons. The model assigned higher rejection probabilities to more difficult items. However, the fusion model struggled to identify items flagged for bias, sensitivity, fairness, or accessibility, especially for ELA. These findings suggest that text-based AIE is feasible in some areas and may offer a practical tool for reducing the burden of manual review and field testing, while also underscoring the importance of human review for items with fairness concerns.

Hotaka Maeda, Yikai Lu

Smarter Balanced, University of California-Santa Cruz · Department of Educational Psychology, University of Minnesota-Twin Cities

Educational Assessment Text Classification Automated Evaluation

Aug 6, 2026cs.AI

Bias Analysis of L2 Speaking Assessment Systems Using Concept Activation Vectors

Automatic speaking assessment systems are increasingly deployed in high-stakes settings to mark second language (L2) learners' speaking tests, making it critical to show that their scores depend on speaking proficiency rather than irrelevant speaker attributes such as first language (L1) or age. Transformer-based foundation models have improved the accuracy of these L2 speaking graders, but their black-box representations make fairness and interpretability analysis more difficult. Building on prior work that used Concept Activation Vectors (CAVs) to detect bias towards unwanted attributes (`concepts') in feature-based graders, we extend CAV-based analysis to two neural speaking assessment systems: a text-based BERT grader and a speech-and-text multimodal grader based on Whisper. CAVs represent human-interpretable concepts as directions in a model's activation space, allowing us to distinguish between whether a concept is encoded in a model's internal representations and whether it influences the predicted score, the latter quantified using a gradient-based sensitivity metric. Since CAVs rely on linear separability, which is less likely in complex neural embedding spaces, we also investigate whether sparse autoencoders (SAEs) provide cleaner concept directions by learning CAVs in a sparse latent space and mapping them back to activation space. Our analysis shows that concept recoverability depends strongly on the representation and architecture being probed, rather than on the concept alone. Sensitivity to concepts is also architecture-dependent. SAEs make concepts more linearly recoverable, but attenuate the original activation-space sensitivity, especially in low-dimensional layers. These findings highlight the need to distinguish concept recoverability from concept influence when auditing bias in speaking assessment systems.

Arya Labroo, Mengjie Qian, Kate Knill

University of Cambridge

Language Model Bias Evaluation Automated Evaluation Speech Language Models

Aug 6, 2026cs.AI

Schema-Guided Hierarchical Information Extraction and Semantic Evaluation Using Generative AI

We present a schema-based framework for extracting complex, structured information from unstructured text documents using generative AI, followed by automated semantic evaluation of the extracted information against a gold standard. The schema, serving as an information model encoding domain knowledge, provides a unified, systematic, and consistent framework for extraction of hierarchical, nested information, with attributes of variable cardinality, and subsequent evaluation of the results. Information extraction from a document is performed in a single call to the model, in zero-shot mode. In the evaluation step, we introduce a path-based semantic matching algorithm to align the nested, variable-cardinality attributes in the extracted results with those in the gold standard. We use generative AI for semantic comparison of the extracted and gold standard values of an attribute, and introduce a rubric to classify the result of the comparison, according to domain-specific considerations, as an exact, semantic, useful, or non-match. We were able to extract 12 out of 14 attributes with an F1 score of

>

90% from documents published by the health technology assessment organisation NICE, using the generative AI model Claude Opus 3. The time needed to extract the attributes from a document was

\sim

30 times lower than the time taken by a human domain expert. We further demonstrate generalisability of this framework across different generative AI models and transferability across different HTA organisations and languages.

Modhurita Mitra, Jan-Willem Versteeg, Maarten D. Schermer +3

Research Engineering Team, Information and Technology Services, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands · Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Clinical Pharmacology, Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands

Document Information Extraction Automated Evaluation Generative AI Evaluation

Aug 5, 2026cs.AI

When Shared Rollouts Fail in Defensive Driving Evaluation: A NAVSIM Score Basis Audit

Defensive driving scores are useful only when they preserve distinctions between policies that observe surrounding actors and those that do not. Re-simulation benchmarks may use reference-conditioned forgiveness, under which an agent receives credit when the logged human reference fails a compliance channel. When agent and reference share an unstable rollout transformation, this rule can propagate shared reference failures into broad compliance credit. We audit this risk in NAVSIM v2.2 original scene single-stage scoring. Under the affected documented-stack condition on the audited numerical backend, the route-blind Ignore-All probe and a route-aware actor-blind probe outrank human replay and PDM-Closed over the complete 12,146-token navtest split. A fresh installation following the public specification reproduces rollout divergence on a fixed 32-token diagnostic set. A same-source dependency stack control and an exact-input diagnostic isolate dependency-sensitive numerical behavior in the shared velocity refit. On a 450-token control pool, replacing only the solver eliminates rollout divergence and restores blind-last ordering while keeping forgiveness enabled. Thus, the numerical instability is the direct trigger. Reference-conditioned forgiveness propagates the resulting shared reference failures into compliance credit. We contribute an audit protocol requiring score basis and stack disclosure, blind probes, overwrite reporting, and rollout stability tests before using such scores for defensive driving claims.

Ziang Wei, Minjun Yu, Zheyuan Lai +2

Autonomous Driving Benchmarks Autonomous Driving Safety Evaluation Automated Evaluation Autonomous Driving Simulation

Aug 4, 2026cs.CL

Hallucinations on the Board: Tool-Augmented Evaluation of LLM Chess Commentary

Superhuman game engines in domains like chess have made expert-level evaluations easily accessible, yet they communicate what is true without the natural-language explanations that make such expertise educationally useful to experts and non-experts alike. Large language models could, in principle, bridge this gap, but they frequently hallucinate due to limited domain-specific knowledge, and standard reference-based or LLM-as-a-judge frameworks cannot reliably detect these errors. In this work, we present ACT-Eval, an evaluation framework that decomposes chess commentary into atomic claims and routes them to engine-supported tools and expert-annotated gold references to assess factual correctness, conceptual coverage, and move-quality judgment. We release a benchmark of 325 position--move pairs spanning pedagogical, tournament, and critical positions, including 125 positions with expert-verified gold atoms and a five-class error taxonomy. Evaluating leading proprietary and open-weight models, we find that factual hallucinations remain pervasive in chess commentary: GPT-5.4 without tools produces incorrect sub-claims 22.0% of the time, while smaller open-weight models exceed 40%. Although tool augmentation substantially improves factual correctness and move-quality assessment, coverage of expert strategic and tactical ideas remains limited across all models. Human calibration shows that ACT-Eval's factual judgments fall within the observed range of inter-human agreement, while its coverage scores correlate strongly with human assessments of strategic completeness.

S. Ashwin Hebbar, Peiyao Sheng, Sewoong Oh +1

Princeton University · Sentient Labs · University of Washington

LLM Evaluation Tool-Use Evaluation Hallucination in Language Models Chess Automated Evaluation

Aug 4, 2026cs.AI

LiveEvalBench: Toward Open-World Evaluation for Web Generation

Large language models are increasingly capable of synthesizing executable frontend projects, yet existing benchmarks still treat web generation as a static evaluation problem. We argue that frontend artifacts demand a different paradigm: they are interactive rather than static, admit diverse yet equally valid implementations, and evolve faster than rigid pipelines can accommodate. To address these gaps, we present LiveEvalBench, an automated framework that reformulates web-generation evaluation as an agentic, adaptive, and extensible process. LiveEvalBench instantiates evaluation as a collaborative review workflow, in which a Build Engineer, a Code Engineer, and a UI Tester collectively gather evidence across the full lifecycle of a frontend project, from deployment and code inspection to browser-based interaction. To handle implementation diversity, an adaptive protocol couples shared rubrics for cross-model comparability with implementation-grounded criteria tailored to each artifact. The framework further supports incremental integration of new evaluator roles and assessment dimensions without pipeline redesign. Experiments across diverse real-world web-generation scenarios show that LiveEvalBench aligns closely with human expert judgment and provides fine-grained insights into frontier models' web generation capabilities. Code is available at https://github.com/wyysteelhead/LiveEvalBench

Yiyao Wang, Zhen Wen, Yinghao Tang +5

State Key Lab of CAD&CG, Zhejiang University · Ant Group · State Key Lab of CAD&CG, Zhejiang University; Laboratory of Art and Archaeology Image (Zhejiang University), Ministry of Education, China

Web Application Generation Automated Evaluation

Aug 4, 2026cs.CL

Looking under the Wrong Lamppost: On the Limitations of Automated Translation Quality Estimation

Automation of Translation Quality Estimation (QE) has emerged as a widely discussed approach to managing translation quality at scale, and a growing number of tools and technologies have been released in pursuit of this goal. However, the proliferation of new QE systems has not always been accompanied by robust, transparent, and reproducible research and testing. This gap deserves critical scrutiny. This paper examines some fundamental limitations of the QE technology from both theoretical and empirical perspectives, arguing that current QE systems are structurally ill-equipped to serve as reliable standalone tools in real-world translation workflows. The reviewed evidence suggests that QE suffers from a range of interrelated and largely unresolved limitations. Most fundamentally, the evaluation of the quality of translation at the level of isolated segments is problematic because it tends to miss out on cohesion, coherence, and stylistic and rhetorical text features. In addition, empirical research documents several other limitations and flaws, including failure to generalize, systematic biases, overfitting and distribution collapse, performance gaps, error annotation challenges, and data scarcity. These are structural limitations arising from the complexity of human language and translation as a cognitive and communicative act - limitations that more data and better architectures have so far not overcome. Consequently, segment-level QE scores should not be used as a standalone basis for routing, release, or review bypass in production; we argue future work should focus on automating human evaluation grounded in MQM.

Serge Gladkoff, Angelika Vaasa, Sue Ellen Wright +2

Logrus Global LLC · European Parliament, DG for Translation and Clear Language · Kent State University +2

Automated Evaluation MT Evaluation

Aug 3, 2026cs.IR

Advancing Relevance Measurement with Vision-Language Models for Web-Scale Search

Relevance evaluation plays a crucial role in personalized search systems, serving as a guardrail alongside user engagement metrics to ensure that search results align with user queries and intent. While human annotation is the traditional method for relevance evaluation, its high cost and long turnaround time limit its scalability. In this work, we present a VLM-based automated relevance evaluation pipeline deployed within Pinterest Search for online A/B experiments. We rigorously validate the alignment between VLM-generated judgments and human annotations, demonstrating that VLMs can provide reliable relevance measurement for experiments while greatly improving the evaluation efficiency. Leveraging VLM-based labeling further unlocks opportunities to expand the query set, optimize sampling design, and efficiently assess a wider range of search experiences at scale. This approach leads to higher-quality relevance metrics and significantly reduces the Minimum Detectable Effects (MDEs) in online experiment measurements.

Han Wang, Alex Whitworth, Pak Ming Cheung +5

Pinterest · San Francisco, CA, USA

VLM Evaluation Automated Evaluation IR Evaluation

Aug 3, 2026cs.AI

ParEvalLayer: When Partial LLM-Agent Evaluations Support a Decision

LLM-agent evaluations often produce task outcomes long before the full benchmark run is complete. A partial score is tempting to report, but it does not show whether the observed tasks support the same conclusion as the completed evaluation. Early tasks can omit important parts of a benchmark, running cheaper tasks first can distort the observed sample, and a rule that decides only easy pairs can appear accurate while leaving many comparisons unresolved. We introduce ParEvalLayer, a decision layer that reads paired outcomes for two agent systems and a comparison policy chosen in advance. For each partial run, it records whether the tested agent system is better by the required amount, is not better by that amount, needs more evidence, or should abstain. We evaluate ParEvalLayer by replaying completed public benchmark data as if each evaluation had stopped earlier. At each point, ParEvalLayer applies the policy using only the outcomes observed so far; if it reaches one of the two comparison judgments, we check whether that judgment matches the completed data for the same system pair. With the main comparison rule, three of the public benchmarks reach the same decision as the completed evaluation after observing only 15% to 25% of task outcomes. Other benchmarks require more task outcomes. This variation shows why a partial score alone is not enough: reports should also state the decision rule and how many comparisons remain without a decision.

Wei-Jung Huang, Bonan Shen

Independent Researcher · United States

Pairwise Comparison LLM Agent Evaluation AI Agent Benchmarks Automated Evaluation

Aug 3, 2026cs.AI

From Simple QA to Deep Research: A Verifiable Benchmark Constructed through Iterative Task Evolution

Deep research benchmarks require expert-level tasks and reliable evaluation grounded in task-specific knowledge. Existing benchmarks rely heavily on expert authoring or pre-existing human-authored materials, while fully automatic construction struggles to ensure consistent and traceable verification. To address this gap, we introduce a verifiable benchmark of 500 deep research tasks spanning 31 topics and 10 major categories, with three query forms designed to probe complementary capabilities required for deep research. The benchmark is constructed automatically using an iterative Explorer-Formalizer-Challenger pipeline that progressively transforms simple questions into deep research tasks. Each task is represented as a directed acyclic graph (DAG) of atomic steps and associated checkpoints, enabling the query, DAG, and rubrics to evolve together in a controlled manner. Experiments demonstrate that the benchmark clearly discriminates among models and query types, while its fact-grounded pointwise rubrics enable fine-grained, human-aligned, and stable evaluation. Our data, implementation, and results are publicly available.

Can Wang, Haoran Chen, Haowen Gao +3

Shandong Key Laboratory of Digital Service Computing Technology and Systems · Alibaba Token Hub · State Key Laboratory of AI Safety, Institute of Computing Technology, Chinese Academy of Sciences +1

LLM Evaluation Benchmark Design Synthetic Benchmark Generation Automated Evaluation

Aug 2, 2026cs.AI

Scoring Rules! Statistical and Strategic Alignment for Text Evaluation Metrics

Reference-based text evaluation metrics, which are widely used to assess natural language generation systems, score a candidate response by comparing it with a reference response. The reliability of an evaluation metric is usually judged by its statistical correlation with human ratings. However, as these metrics are increasingly used as optimization objectives, correlation alone is no longer sufficient: agents may strategically game the evaluation metric. We study this issue through two complementary notions of alignment. A metric is statistically aligned if it correlates with human ratings and strategically aligned if it resists perturbations that do not add task-relevant information. We make two contributions. First, we propose test principles for reference-based metrics consisting of human-rating correlation, degradation sensitivity, and manipulation robustness. These principles evaluate whether a metric agrees with human judgments, penalizes low-effort information loss, and resists strategic score inflation. Second, we develop a unified design framework for mutual-information-based metrics that decomposes existing and new metrics into four choices: information measure, estimation method, text representation, and prediction mechanism. Across peer review, summarization, and question answering, we find that strong human-rating correlation does not imply strategic alignment: LLM-as-a-Judge achieves high correlation but is susceptible to manipulation. In contrast, mutual-information-based metrics substantially improve manipulation robustness. Our framework also uncovers a new metric that achieves the strongest overall robustness in our experiments while remaining competitive on human-rating correlation.

Shengwei Xu, Yuxuan Lu, Yifan Wu +2

University of Michigan · Peking University · Microsoft Research +1

Language Model Generation Evaluation Automated Evaluation Mutual Information

Aug 2, 2026cs.LG

Who Belongs in the Eval Set? A Capability-Taxonomy-Driven Pipeline for Curating Regression Eval Sets in Agent-Extensibility Platforms

Platform teams hosting agent-extensibility surfaces face a regression-economics paradox: every onboarding customer ships an evaluation set tuned to their domain, but the platform's regression set must live under a hard query-count ceiling bounded by release cadence. To our knowledge, no published industrial pipeline addresses this platform-side curation problem: existing evaluation frameworks are customer-side, and benchmark-compression work treats benchmarks as fixed pools rather than streams of incoming sets. We describe a capability-taxonomy-driven curation pipeline applied to declarative agents with custom actions in Microsoft 365 Copilot. It takes an agent specification and a customer's eval set as input, projects each query into a platform-owned capability taxonomy, and outputs per-query decisions (admit, drop, swap, or human review), under the philosophy that a healthy regression set is the minimal set of queries capturing the maximal spread of capability signatures -- distinct combinations of capabilities a query exercises together. Three components instantiate this: a classifier producing per-(query, capability) verdicts via a hybrid of deterministic specification-based extraction and large-language-model (LLM) semantic inference; an Invocation Quality (IQ) rater scoring how thoroughly a query exercises each capability, so a new query sharing a signature with an existing entry can still be recognized as a better test and displace it; and a consolidator comparing incoming queries against the regression set on coverage and quality through a rule-based decision cascade, backed by a conservative curator that only suggests evictions. The mechanism is taxonomy-agnostic and applies to any regression eval-set curation problem with a typed capability taxonomy, including taxonomies that evolve in response to the very evidence the pipeline surfaces.

Tezan Sahu, Aritra Das, Pankaj Mittal +1

Microsoft Hyderabad, India · Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee Roorkee, India

Benchmark Construction LLM Agent Evaluation AI Agent Benchmarks Automated Evaluation

Aug 1, 2026cs.AI

Slides2MindMap: Reconstructing Cognitively Efficient Knowledge Hierarchies from Lecture Slides

Generating mind maps from lecture slides can help learners efficiently assimilate fragmented knowledge, promising substantial benefits for intelligent education. However, dedicated automatic generation and evaluation frameworks remain underexplored and challenging, requiring a global-local knowledge focus balance and handling large-scale, heterogeneous slides. We formulate the Slides2MindMap task, which aims to reconstruct cognitively efficient knowledge hierarchies from a course's slide deck collection. For systematic evaluation, we introduce S2M-Bench, a benchmark comprising 12,774 slide pages with expert-annotated mind maps spanning 24 university courses. S2M-Bench includes a cognitive-science-grounded evaluation framework that integrates ground-truth-based comparison, structure conformity analysis, and VLM-as-a-Judge. To address this task, we propose AutoMindMap, an agentic framework inspired by the Structure Building Framework. AutoMindMap comprises Skeleton Laying for global scaffold anchoring, Iterative Knowledge Integration augmented by context-aware summarization, and Dual-Stage Refinement with a local-global decoupling mechanism. The framework reconciles local knowledge faithfulness with global coherence, and adapts to slide-specific features. Experiments on S2M-Bench demonstrate that AutoMindMap outperforms baselines and achieves superior robustness across different models and scenarios, underscoring its pedagogical application value.

Yuzhi Wang, Rongjun Ye, Shengyuan Chen +5

1The Hong Kong Polytechnic University · 2Shanghai Jiaotong University

Document Understanding Educational Technology Automated Evaluation

Jul 31, 2026cs.CL

CalibratedRubric: Task-Adaptive Rubric Banks for Open-Ended LLM Evaluation

Reliable evaluation of open-ended LLM outputs requires fine-grained rubrics, yet expert curation is costly and difficult to scale. Existing automated pipelines rely on strict judge unanimity and binary variance filters, which cannot distinguish measurable rubrics from informative ones. We introduce CalibratedRubric, a task-adaptive framework that combines type-specific scoring, Bayesian rubric-measurability filtering, and item response theory (IRT)-based bank assembly. CalibratedRubric estimates each rubric's measurability with a Beta--Bernoulli agreement posterior and uses a submodular information-coverage objective to construct compact rubric banks over the observed capability range. Across financial, healthcare, general, and legal benchmarks, measurability filtering improves human-gold agreement on JudgmentBench from

κ=0.604

to

0.743

. IRT-based greedy selection improves cross-fitted rank fidelity over random selection across all six evaluated response blocks and requires only 49 rather than 131 rubrics to reach the target correlation on FinResearchBench decision-support tasks. Task-label perturbations further reduce system separation, confirming the practical relevance of task-adaptive scoring. These results support CalibratedRubric as an efficient, uncertainty-aware approach to open-ended LLM evaluation, with calibration gains depending on sufficient judge redundancy.

Mengting Chen, Yanshu Sun, Wanting Liang +5

FinStep · StepFun

Open-Ended Generation LLM Evaluation Language Model Generation Evaluation Rubric-Based Evaluation Automated Evaluation

Jul 31, 2026cs.AI

Towards Query-Agnostic RAG Evaluation via Query Coverage and Claim Verifiability

Retrieval-augmented generation improves the factuality of large language models by grounding responses in retrieved evidence, yet existing evaluation frameworks struggle to provide consistent, fine-grained diagnostics across the diverse spectrum of user queries, ranging from close-ended fact-seeking to open-ended explanatory requests. We propose Q-CARE, a query-agnostic and fully reference-free framework that enables fine-grained assessment by decomposing queries into sub-queries and answers into atomic claims. Q-CARE establishes a unified evaluation principle based on query coverage and claim verifiability, yielding coverage-aware retriever metrics (C-Prec@k, C-nDCG@k) and claim-level generator metrics (Completeness, Conciseness, and Verifiableness). On a human-annotated benchmark spanning eight datasets, Q-CARE achieves higher correlation with human judgments than four existing RAG evaluation metrics, including RAGEval and RAGChecker, proving its effectiveness as a reliable, automated evaluation framework. Code and data are publicly available at https://github.com/DISL-Lab/Q-CaRE-COLM-26.

Jeonghwan Choi, Taewon Yun, Minjeong Ban +3

1Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (KAIST) · 2Cluvion

Reference-Free Evaluation RAG Evaluation Automated Evaluation IR Evaluation