LLM Evaluation

LLM: Large Language Model

Follow this topic Ask about this topic

Momentum

194 papers in the last four weeks, up 87% on the four weeks before. 1.9% of all new papers.

Jul 13Week of Sep 28

Latest papers 1,643

Jul 2, 2026cs.AI

Coresets Before Score Sets: Evaluation-Unsupervised Prompt Subset Selection for LLM Benchmarks

We study LLM benchmark coreset selection: selecting a small subset of prompts over multiple benchmarks whose induced model scores and rankings approximate those obtained from the full benchmark suite. In evaluation-unsupervised benchmark coreset selection (our approach), the selection algorithm uses no model evaluation outcomes, and operates on a fine granularity by producing subsets of prompts over multiple benchmarks rather than producing a sub-collection of entire benchmarks. We use submodular subset selection, and we develop and evaluate many different submodular functions for this purpose, including determinantal point process (DPP) based approaches, submodular mutual information functions, and facility location-based functions. On a new large-scale suite of 35 heterogeneous benchmarks spanning five different capability categories, 18 frontier LLMs, and over 61K prompts, we find that the facility location (FL) function operating exclusively on inexpensive semantic prompt embeddings preserves LLM scores better than twelve separate score-based and diversity-based baselines, across a range of coreset budgets. Moreover, we show our proposed objective is not limited to the evaluation-unsupervised regime: in the setting where only a handful of whole benchmarks must be selected and a large amount of model scores are available, the same objective matches or outperforms state-of-the-art baselines on the MMLU and MTEB leaderboards, while being substantially cheaper to compute. Together, our results suggest that submodularity, in general, is a strong and reliable tool for benchmark compression.

Jihan Yao, Gantavya Bhatt, Arnav Das +16

University of Washington, Seattle · 6NVIDIA · 5LMSYS +3

Submodular Optimization LLM Evaluation Coreset Selection

Jul 2, 2026cs.CL

Know Your Source: A Public Knowledge Store for Media Background Checks

LLM-based retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) is increasingly used for automated fact-checking (AFC) and related tasks. By grounding LLM outputs in retrieved evidence, RAG-based systems provide transparent justifications while allowing external information to be updated independently of the underlying model. However, existing approaches often assume retrieved evidence is reliable, although real-world information may be conflicting, outdated, and can originate from unreliable or biased sources. Recent work on source-critical reasoning addresses this challenge through media background checks (MBCs) (Schlichtkrull, 2024), which assess the credibility of evidence sources to support downstream fact verification. However, generating MBCs relies on costly proprietary search APIs, limiting reproducibility. To mitigate this issue, we introduce MEDIAREF, a publicly available knowledge store of web-sourced documents that enables reproducible, low-cost evaluation of MBC generation across 200 media sources. We describe a reproducible methodology for constructing and updating the collection, assess widely used LLMs on the MBC generation task, and demonstrate that MEDIAREF supports higher-quality MBC generation through both automatic and qualitative evaluation.

Benjamin Nichols, Michael Schlichtkrull, Nedjma Ousidhoum

△Cardiff University · ⋄Queen Mary University of London

LLM Evaluation Automated Fact-Checking

Jul 2, 2026cs.CL

Object Aligner: A Configurable JSON Schema Similarity Score for Graphs, Applied to LLM Prompt Optimization

Large language models (LLMs) are often asked to produce JSON conforming to a fixed schema, powering information extraction, tool calling, agentic planning, and knowledge-graph construction. Measuring how closely an output matches a gold reference is essential yet surprisingly hard: exact match is brittle, text similarity ignores structure, and an LLM judge is expensive, opaque, and non-deterministic. We address this with Object Aligner (OA), an open-source Python library that scores two JSON objects deterministically by recursively aligning their trees (the Hungarian algorithm for unordered collections, sequence alignment for ordered ones) and awarding partial credit at the granularity the schema declares. The Object Aligner is configured entirely through a set of JSON Schema extensions, so adapting it to a new task involves annotating a schema rather than writing code. Complex structured data, however, are rarely flat trees: records may form graphs or hypergraphs keyed by arbitrary identifiers, breaking the assumptions of prior similarity metrics. Our central contribution, referential alignment, closes this gap by inferring a bijection between gold and candidate identifiers and scoring every reference through it, so the score is invariant to relabeling. Since recovering this bijection exactly is graph isomorphism, the Object Aligner approximates it with Weisfeiler-Leman color refinement. An order-sensitive sequence regime targets ranking and planning. Since the same alignment localizes every mismatch, the Object Aligner emits ranked repair suggestions at no extra cost. Used as a reward inside the GEPA prompt optimizer, Object Aligner helps or stays neutral across all datasets.

Jan Drchal

Artificial Intelligence Center, Faculty of Electrical Engineering, Czech Technical University in Prague, Czech Republic

LLM Evaluation Language Model Generation Evaluation Graph Matching Automated Evaluation

Jul 2, 2026cs.AI

Pre-Flight: A Benchmark for Evaluating Large Language Models on Aviation Operational Knowledge

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly proposed for aviation business operations, from documentation and training generation to customer facing assistants. General purpose benchmarks do not measure whether a model reasons safely and correctly about aviation specific operational knowledge, and the high stakes, regulated nature of the domain makes that gap consequential. We present Pre-Flight, an open source benchmark of 300 multiple choice questions drawn from international standards and airport ground operations material, covering international airport ground operations, ICAO and US FAA regulations, aviation general knowledge and complex operational scenarios. Questions were authored and reviewed by practitioners with experience in air traffic management, ground operations and commercial flying. We evaluate a range of contemporary commercial and open weight models using the Inspect evaluation framework, scoring by accuracy under a standard multiple choice protocol, and we maintain the leaderboard on a rolling basis as new models are released. Against an informal expert reference of around 95%, obtained from a low sample quiz of aviation professionals at a conference, even the strongest model evaluated (released in 2026) reaches 82.7%, having improved only gradually from roughly 75% in early 2025. A substantial and persistent gap below expert level reliability therefore remains. We release the dataset, the evaluation harness and the results, and the benchmark is available within the community evaluations package distributed with inspect_evals. We argue that domain specific evaluation of this kind is a necessary precondition for responsible deployment of generative AI in non safety critical aviation operations.

Alex Brooker, Tim Hughes

Airside Labs, London, United Kingdom · Mahino Research, Christchurch, New Zealand

Jul 2, 2026cs.AI

Meta-Benchmarks for Financial-Services LLM Evaluation

Public LLM leaderboards optimise for global average performance and do not capture the specific cognitive demands of financial-services work: a model that leads on MMLU-Pro may underperform on document-grounded compliance reasoning, and a coding leader may handle multi-turn customer interactions poorly. We present a meta-benchmarking framework that organises 452 publicly reported benchmarks into 41 O*NET Generalized Work Activities and aggregates those into 38 BIAN banking business domains spanning sales, operations, risk, and support work. A multiplicative weighting scheme (discrimination x coverage x recency), computed over a rolling model window, rewards benchmarks that still separate the best models, are widely reported, and remain in active use, suppressing saturated legacy tests automatically. These weights scale the K-factor in a pairwise Elo tournament, producing cross-benchmark-comparable work-activity scores without raw score normalisation; business-domain scores are weighted averages of the constituent work-activity Elos. We demonstrate the framework on a point-in-time public snapshot covering 288 models across 25 organisations as of June 2026, and describe the methodology, full taxonomy, design decisions, and limitations with the aim of making the approach reproducible for institutions facing similar selection and governance challenges.

Blair Hudson

Commonwealth Bank of Australia

Financial Services LLM Evaluation Benchmark Design Benchmark Validity Finance

Jul 2, 2026cs.LG

Geometric Signatures of Reasoning: A Spectral Perspective on Task Hardness

Chain-of-thought (CoT) reasoning enables large language models (LLMs) to solve complex problems by generating intermediate reasoning steps. While much attention has been paid to the length and content of these reasoning chains, far less is known about their internal geometry. We study the \emph{geometry} of CoT trajectories in the hidden state space of transformer models, formalizing each reasoning chain as a discrete curve in

\mathbb{R}^d

and characterizing it through spectral, positional, and kinematic geometric functionals. We introduce the effective dimension

d_ρ

as a measure of trajectory complexity and show theoretically that trajectories with flatter eigenvalue spectra correspond to harder tasks, as they explore more of the hidden dimensions. Lastly, we explore how kinematic features of the trajectory, mean position, positional dispersion, initial and current hidden states, mean velocity, mean speed, and speed dispersion, can be used to predict solution correctness before generation is complete, and may inform future early-stopping strategies. Experimentally, on mathematical reasoning problems from the MATH500 dataset,

d_ρ

achieves

0.93

AUC in distinguishing easy from hard problems, while kinematic features potentially can predict correctness from only the first

20\%

of generated tokens. These correctness signatures transfer across questions of varying difficulty, establishing that the shape of a model's internal reasoning trajectory is a principled window into both task hardness and solution quality.

Aria Masoomi, Mahsa Bazzaz, Adel Javanmard +1

1Northeastern University · University of Southern California · 3Google Research

LLM Evaluation Representation Geometry in Language Models LLM Mathematical Reasoning LLM Reasoning Reasoning Trace Analysis

Jul 1, 2026cs.CL

Parameter Golf: What Really Works?

How far can a language model improve under a strict artifact budget? Parameter Golf posed this question as an open community challenge in which participants trained the best language model, with the complete artifact (training code + compressed weights) required to fit within 16 MB and be trained in under ten minutes on 8xH100 SXM GPUs. Quality was measured in bits-per-byte (BPB), the average number of bits required to encode each byte of unseen text. We analyze 2,037 pull requests and 1,430 clean scored submissions from the contest, build a taxonomy of 84 optimization techniques, and measure each technique's contribution to BPB. The verified leaderboard score dropped from 1.2244 to 1.058 BPB across three phases -- a 13.6% reduction, despite individual techniques rarely improving BPB by more than 1%. We show that most gains in techniques shrink across competitive submissions, isolating the few methods that improve performance across stacks.

Prashanna Mani Paudel, Shivanand Venkanna Sheshappanavar

Geometric Intelligence Research Lab., Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science University of Wyoming

LLM Evaluation LLM Compression Efficient Language Model Training Language Modeling

Jul 1, 2026cs.CL

IsoSci: A Benchmark of Isomorphic Cross-Domain Science Problems for Evaluating Reasoning versus Knowledge Retrieval in LLMs

We introduce ISOSCI, a benchmark of isomorphic cross-domain science problem pairs that separates reasoning ability from domain knowledge retrieval in LLM evaluation. Each pair shares identical logical structure but requires different domain-specific knowledge, enabling controlled attribution of reasoning-mode gains. Across five model pairs spanning four model families, we find that 91.3% of reasoning-mode gains are knowledge-dependent rather than structure-invariant (63/69 gains; Wilson 95% CI [82.3%, 96.0%]), directly challenging the assumption that chain-of-thought reasoning improves short-horizon procedural scientific problem-solving. Reasoning toggles on highly capable models provide less than 5 percentage points accuracy gain across all domains, and a reasoning-specialized model (o3-mini) that outperforms its standard counterpart on GPQA Diamond (+19.2 percentage points) underperforms on ISOSCI (-24.7 percentage points), showing that benchmark choice determines conclusions about reasoning utility. We release ISOSCI at https://huggingface.co/datasets/isosci/isosci

Samir Abdaljalil, Erchin Serpedin, Hasan Kurban

Electrical and Computer Engineering Texas A&M University College Station, TX USA · College of Science and Engineering Hamad Bin Khalifa University Doha, Qatar

LLM Evaluation Scientific Reasoning Factual Knowledge in Language Models LLM Reasoning

Jul 1, 2026cs.CL

RusFinChain: A Russian Benchmark for Verifiable Chain-of-Thought Reasoning in Finance with Fuzzy-Aligned Evaluation

Multi-step symbolic reasoning is essential for robust financial analysis, yet most benchmarks neglect intermediate reasoning steps. FINCHAIN introduced verifiable Chain-of-Thought (CoT) evaluation but is limited to English. FINESSE-Bench includes a Russian block but relies on multiple-choice questions without step-level supervision. We present RusFinChain, the first Russian-language symbolic benchmark for verifiable CoT reasoning in finance. It spans 17 domains, 172 topics, and comprises 5,280 parameterized examples from executable Python templates, ensuring contamination-free evaluation. Each example includes a gold-standard reasoning chain with intermediate numeric values for automatic verification. We also introduce enhanced metrics: Fuzzy Numeric Alignment and Soft-Attention Alignment. We evaluate 8 open-weight LLMs on a stratified sample, generating 8,100 responses. Results reveal a substantial reasoning gap: models achieve Hard F1 of ~0.65 for step alignment, but only ~29% of final answers are correct. Our fuzzy and soft metrics show stronger correlation with final-answer correctness (Spearman rho approx 0.48) than the original ChainEval (rho approx 0.38-0.46), demonstrating superior diagnostic power. We release dataset, code, and evaluation framework to foster verifiable financial AI for the Russian-speaking community.

M. K. Arabov

Kazan Federal University · Institute of Computational Mathematics and Information Technologies · Department of Data Analysis +1

Logical Reasoning LLM Evaluation CoT Evaluation Symbolic Reasoning Finance

Jul 1, 2026cs.CL

Measuring the Gap Between Human and LLM Research Ideas

LLMs are increasingly used to brainstorm research ideas, but existing evaluations mostly judge individual ideas by novelty, feasibility, or expert preference. We instead ask: how far are current LLM-generated ideas from human researchers? To characterize this gap, we build a large-scale evaluation framework for ideation from high-quality human research papers. For each paper, we reverse-engineer a small set of closely related prior works that likely inspired its core idea. LLMs are then prompted to generate a new idea from the set of paper titles and summaries. We introduce a two-axis research-taste taxonomy to profile each idea by its opportunity pattern and research paradigm, and use it to quantify the divergence between human and LLM ideas. Across idea sets generated by different LLMs, we observe a consistent distributional gap: LLM ideas are disproportionately concentrated around bridge-like opportunities and synthesis methods, whereas the human paper reference distribution spreads more broadly across ways of framing gaps and constructing contributions. This result suggests that strong LLMs can produce a range of reasonable ideas, but that range remains narrower than, and systematically shifted relative to, human research taste.

Ziyu Chen, Yilun Zhao, Arman Cohan

University of Chicago · Yale University

LLM Evaluation Scientific Hypothesis Generation Research Idea Generation Large Language Model-Guided Scientific Discovery

Jul 1, 2026cs.CL

AGC-Bench: Measuring Artificial General Creativity

Creativity research has debated whether creativity is domain-specific (e.g., visual, writing, science), and if it is psychometrically separable from general intelligence. Both questions now apply to LLMs, but a unified benchmark of AI creativity remains elusive. We introduce AGC-Bench, an artificial general creativity benchmark built from a systematic review of the AI creativity literature (3,101 papers screened, 497 benchmarks identified), paired with an agentic harness that converts idiosyncratic codebases into HELM-standardized benchmarks. The first release covers 78 datasets spanning brainstorming, problem solving, STEM, narrative, figurative language, and humor. To address bias in LLM-as-judge, we apply Judge Response Theory -- a psychometric calibration of judge leniency/severity; we then fine-tune Qwen3-30B on the bias-corrected ratings of three frontier LLMs to produce AGC-Judge, an open-weight model that robustly scores new creativity benchmarks it was not trained on. Results reveal frontier models at the top of the AGC-Bench leaderboard, with open models close behind. LLMs show different creative strengths, ranking higher on some domains (e.g., writing) than others (e.g., scientific ideation). Extensive experiments yield three main findings. First, applying factor analysis across 83 LLMs, we recover a single creativity factor 'c', analogous to the 'g' factor of general intelligence, that explains 81.5% of variance, related to but separable from general knowledge/reasoning. Second, we show that prompting models to "be creative" boosts their performance far more than enabling reasoning, evidence that the benchmark tracks creativity over general ability. Third, on a human-matched subset, we find the top human still leads the top LLM on creativity. We release AGC-Bench with a public leaderboard, AGC-Judge, and human data as open infrastructure for measuring AI creativity at scale.

Roger Beaty, Vijeta Deshpande, Clin K. Y. Lai +9

1Pennsylvania State University · University of Massachusetts Lowell · University of Amsterdam +2

Creativity Assessment LLM Evaluation LLM-as-a-Judge Computational Creativity Generative AI Evaluation

Jul 1, 2026cs.CL

Quantifying the Affective Gap: A Zero-Shot Evaluation of LLMs on Fine-Grained Emotion Taxonomies

Emotion recognition in natural language is a foundational challenge in affective computing, with critical implications for human-computer interaction, mental health support, and conversational AI. This paper presents a rigorous, unified zero-shot evaluation of three leading commercial large language models: Claude (claude-sonnet-4-6), ChatGPT (GPT-5.4), and Gemini (gemini-2.5-flash). The models were queried through their respective production APIs as of April 2026 on a fine-grained 13-class emotion classification task. Using a stratified 1,000-sentence sample from the boltuix/emotions dataset, which comprises 131,306 sentences across 13 categories, a single uniform prompt with no exemplars was applied identically across all models. Gemini achieves the highest accuracy (39.9%) and macro-F1 score (0.363), followed by GPT-5.4 (38.8%, macro-F1 = 0.291) and Claude (38.0%, macro-F1 = 0.159). All models excel on sarcasm and desire while consistently failing on love, confusion, and shame. McNemar tests reveal no statistically significant pairwise differences (p > 0.10), suggesting convergence at a shared zero-shot ceiling. Claude's markedly lower macro-F1 score exposes a class-imbalance prediction bias. These findings highlight the current limitations of frontier AI systems in zero-shot fine-grained emotion classification.

Lawrence Obiuwevwi, Krzysztof J. Rechowicz, Jessica M. Johnson +3

Old Dominion University, Norfolk, VA, USA

LLM Evaluation Zero-Shot Text Classification Emotion Recognition

Jul 1, 2026cs.CL

Persona Non Grata: LLM Persona-Driven Generations in MCQA are Unstable in Distinct Dimensions

Persona-driven generations (PDGs) have seen prolific use in research and industry applications, where a large language model (LLM) takes on a 'persona' while completing some task. While persona expressed through free-form text (like dialogue) has substantial work investigating stability or consistency, relatively, persona expressed in non-text-heavy outputs (like in multiple-choice question answering, or MCQA) is often overlooked. We work to address this gap, seeking to understand the instability of LLM PDGs in MCQA tasks. We develop three metrics investigating the performance, outcome, and question correctness stability, evaluating three distinct dimensions. Using these metrics, we find that instability varies consistently between model families and model size, and across question domains, with math/commonsense questions leading to greater instability. We also find task prompt format introduces more prediction instability than other hyperparameters, like temperature. Finally, we find that instability is related to task accuracy, and using our instability metrics, find different experimental settings that result in different best and worst personas for tasks, despite their similarity. This reveals the importance of checking hyperparameter instability in PDGs.

César Guerra-Solano, Xiang Lorraine Li

Department of Computer Science, University of Pittsburgh

LLM Evaluation Language Model Generation Evaluation Persona Consistency Multiple-Choice Question Answering LLM Prompting LLM Reliability

Jul 1, 2026cs.CL

MetaHOPE: A Metaphor-Oriented Evaluation Framework for Analysing MT and LLM Translation Errors

In this opinion paper, we propose MetaHOPE, an error severity-aware annotation framework for evaluating metaphor translations. Metaphors present challenges for machine translation (MT) and natural language understanding and processing (NLU, NLP), because it presents the features of semantic complexity, contextual dependency, and cultural embeddings that can lead to ambiguity issues for NLP models. To investigate how state-of-the-art NLP models perform on translating metaphors, we select three representative systems, i.e., GoogleMT, GPT5.4, and Hunyuan-7b as Neural MT (NMT) models and LLMs. We used two human-annotated metaphor corpora, including VUAMC and PSUCMC for English-to-Chinese and Chinese-to-English translation purposes. The original corpora we used are monolingual, where we carried out error annotation using the MetaHOPE framework, and also produced the human post-edited gold reference for bilingual use as a new resource. We believe the MetaHOPE evaluation framework for metaphor translation annotation, the parallel corpora resources, and the error analysis on SOTA automatic translation models can be useful and shed some light for the field of metaphor translation study. We share our resources publicly at github.com/Jiahui84/MetaHOPE

Jiahui Liang, Lifeng Han

Centre for Linguistics, Humanities, Leiden University, NL · LIACS, Leiden University, NL · BDS, Leiden University Medical Centre, NL

LLM Evaluation Machine Translation MT Evaluation

Jul 1, 2026cs.CL

MSQA: A Natively Sourced Multilingual and Multicultural SimpleQA Benchmark

Multilingual fluency often invites a stronger assumption: a model that can speak a user's language must also understand the culture encoded by that language. We call this the Illusion of Cultural Alignment. To test this assumption directly, we introduce MSQA, a benchmark of 1,064 natively sourced questions across 11 language groups, five cultural dimensions, and three difficulty tiers. Unlike translated benchmarks, MSQA targets locally grounded knowledge and reduces shortcuts from English-centric cross-lingual transfer. Evaluating 18 LLMs, we find substantial cultural degradation and a pronounced Locality Effect: cultural competence tracks pre-training exposure more closely than general reasoning ability. We further show that common inference-time remedies do not dissolve the illusion. Models remain overconfident on unfamiliar cultural questions, repeated sampling yields unstable rather than reliable correctness, and retrieval augmentation helps unevenly on long-tail facts. These findings indicate that cultural alignment cannot be inferred from multilingual ability alone and requires deeper intervention than calibration, sampling, or retrieval at inference time

Xianru Chen, Yukai Huang, Mingxiang Chen +6

ByteDance Seed · Nanjing University · M-A-P

Multilingual Language Model Evaluation LLM Evaluation Cross-Cultural Language Model Evaluation Multilingual QA Cultural Bias in Language Models Cultural Knowledge in Language Models

Jul 1, 2026cs.SE

LLVM-Bench: Benchmarking and Advancing Large Language Models for LLVM Compiler Issue Resolution

LLVM is a widely used compiler infrastructure whose scale and complexity make issue resolution labor-intensive and challenging. Although large language models (LLMs) have recently achieved remarkable success in issue resolution, their effectiveness on complex system-level LLVM compiler remains largely unexplored. To address this gap, we introduce LLVM-Bench, the first large-scale benchmark for LLVM issue resolution, containing 423 real-world, validated tasks collected from the LLVM project. We further develop LLVM-Gym, a scalable evaluation platform that automates issue reproduction, patch application, compiler building, and test execution. Using LLVM-Bench and LLVM-Gym, we conduct a comprehensive study of four representative LLMs, six retrieval configurations, and three agents. Our results show that current LLM-based issue resolution techniques remain limited on LLVM-Bench, with patch invalidity and build failures as the dominant failure modes. We further reveal a strong complementarity among different LLMs and agents, motivating LLVM-Ens, a lightweight ensemble approach that expands the patch space through integrating the patches generated by diverse techniques, filters incorrect and redundant candidates, and identifies the most promising solution. Our results show that LLVM-Ens achieves a resolution rate of up to 21.99%, further improving LLVM issue resolution.

Zhao Tian, Yingquan Zhao, Chenyao Suo +2

School of Computer Software, Tianjin University, Tianjin, China · School of Cybersecurity, Tianjin University, Tianjin, China · School of Computer Science, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK

LLM Evaluation Automated Program Repair Language Model Ensembles

Jul 1, 2026cs.CL

YOMI-Bench: A Benchmark for Evaluating Kanji Reading and Phonological Understanding of LLMs for Japanese

We propose YOMI-Bench, a benchmark for evaluating kanji reading and phonological understanding of large language models (LLMs) for Japanese. In Japanese, a single kanji character often has multiple possible readings, making it difficult to infer the correct reading from surface-level text alone. Due to these linguistic characteristics, it is empirically known that LLMs exhibit low performance in kanji reading for Japanese. The proposed YOMI-Bench consists of four tasks specifically designed to evaluate kanji reading performance in Japanese. In our evaluation using YOMI-Bench, we assessed one multilingual open LLM, four Japanese-specific open LLMs, and five commercial LLMs. As a result, we found that even Japanese-specific models show low performance, and that commercial models also perform poorly on generation tasks that require consideration of kanji readings.

Ryota Mibayashi, Hiroya Takamura, Hitomi Yanaka

Kobe University · National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology (AIST) · The University of Tokyo +2

Jul 1, 2026cs.SE

The Moving Target: A Longitudinal Audit of Trustworthiness Drift Across Twelve Checkpoints of Open-Source Chat LLMs

Model cards quote trust-benchmark scores without recording when they were measured, and the same number is routinely carried across successive checkpoints of one release line as if the model behind it had not shifted. We test whether it has shifted by auditing four open-source release lines, Yi, Qwen, Mistral, and Gemma, at three successive generations each, on a fixed basket of trust benchmarks under multiple prompt templates. Mean absolute adjacent-generation drift lands well above an independence-based no-drift reference null, and the gap persists when we drop a benchmark, drop a release line, or switch to strict scoring. We therefore conclude that a trust score attached to a release line should not be carried forward to the next checkpoint without remeasurement; it should instead be reported as a checkpoint-bound, dated artefact, which we package as a longitudinal model card. Closed APIs, larger models, canonical benchmark protocols, and fixed month-cadence rules lie outside the audited scope and require their own evaluation.

Zhichao Fan, Yanhang Li, Zexin Zhuang +2

University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign · Northeastern University · Southern Methodist University +2

LLM Safety Benchmarks LLM Evaluation LLM Auditing LLM Reliability

Jul 1, 2026cs.CL

Beyond Perplexity: A Behavioral Evaluation Framework for Deployment-Memory Claims in LLM Test-Time Training

Large language model test-time training (TTT) is often evaluated through local proxy metrics: models are updated on recent tokens, retrieved context, target-domain data, or verifiable task attempts, and then judged by perplexity, future-token loss, long-context performance, or reward. These metrics are well matched to claims about stream adaptation, domain adaptation, context compression, and reward-backed test-time improvement. They are weaker evidence, however, for a capability that TTT results are increasingly used to motivate: deployed assistant memory, personalization, or sparse post-deployment learning, which instead requires behavioral evidence such as later recall, paraphrase robustness, retention, locality, conflict handling, and use in downstream actions after the original support context is removed. We introduce a behavioral evaluation framework that calibrates TTT memory claims to the evidence that supports them. It has two components: a claim-calibrated evidence ladder that separates stream/domain adaptation, bridge internalization, and deployment-time behavioral learning; and an evaluation protocol with matched explicit-memory baselines and mutually exclusive failure categories. We validate the framework by auditing recent TTT and memory-adjacent work and by instantiating it as a controlled diagnostic in which, in a sparse nonce-fact setting, one-step LoRA updates lower support and answer loss across three Qwen3 model scales while generated free-form recall stays at zero, exposing a measurable gap between proxy improvement and deployment behavior. The framework gives authors and evaluators a concrete standard for aligning TTT memory claims with the evidence actually reported.

Xiangchen Song, Zhenhao Chen, Lingjing Kong +4

Carnegie Mellon University · MBZUAI

LLM Evaluation LLM Memory Test-Time Training LLM Post-Training

Jul 1, 2026cs.LG

Mapping the Evaluation Frontier: An Empirical Survey of the Bias-Reliability Tradeoff Across Eleven Evaluator-Agent Conditions

The bias-reliability tradeoff conjectures that LLM evaluation systems are constrained in (gamma, H, CV) space, where evaluator coupling (gamma), strategy diversity (H), and small-sample measurement reliability (CV(N)) cannot be simultaneously optimized at fixed sample size N. Prior evidence rests on n=5 conditions with complete metrics from a single study. We expand the empirical base to 11 conditions, measuring gamma and H for all 11 (nine with valid weight vectors) and CV(N=5) for seven with sufficient seeds (N >= 5). Five conditions provide the complete (gamma, H, CV) triple. The data confirm the trade-off: conditions with low evaluator coupling (gamma < 0.2) exhibit high measurement noise (CV(N=5) > 1.0), while conditions with strong coupling (gamma > 0.9) achieve low noise (CV(N=5) < 0.16). The correlation r(H, gamma) = -0.989 (n=5, excluding GPT-4o conditions) confirms that evaluator coupling suppresses strategy diversity. Four GPT-4o conditions show gamma=0.000 and H=1.000 across all seeds -- a pattern we attribute to version drift in the June 2026 GPT-4o API. No condition occupies the region {gamma < 0.2, CV(N=5) < 0.3}. We release all per-condition metrics as a standardized benchmark dataset for evaluator comparison.

Zewen Liu

LLM Evaluation LLM-as-a-Judge LLM Reliability Language Model Bias Evaluation

Jul 1, 2026cs.NI

An LLM-Based Framework for Intent-Driven Network Topology Design

Designing deployable and resilient network topologies from natural language requirements remains a challenging problem in network automation. This work investigates the ability of Large Language Models (LLMs) to generate structurally valid and constraint-compliant network topologies through a constraint-driven pipeline combining hierarchical modeling and systematic validation. The framework is evaluated via a multimodel comparison of proprietary and open-weight LLMs across four realistic network scenarios released as a public dataset. We assess structural correctness using node and edge F1-scores against reference topologies, and evaluate resilience through server and content connectivity metrics. In addition, we analyze common failure modes, including interface mismatches and directional inconsistencies in generated topologies. Overall, this work provides a systematic benchmark for understanding how LLMs handle structural and resilience constraints in topology synthesis, and supports informed model selection for AI-driven network design.

Kholoud El-Habbouli, Fen Zhou, Stephane Huet

CERI-LIA, University of Avignon, France

LLM Evaluation Graph Generation

Jun 30, 2026cs.LG

Testing Frontier Large Language Models' Physics Literacy in Parallel Physical Worlds

Current large-language-model (LLM) physics benchmarks are usually scored by answer accuracy, which cannot distinguish genuine reasoning from recall of familiar problem patterns and reveals little about where a model's reasoning breaks down. We introduce an auditable four-stage diagnostic that evaluates whether an LLM can reason inside an unfamiliar physics framework through induction, formulation, prediction, and review. The diagnostic combines locked pre-registrations, fresh sessions between stages, dual-LLM judging, and a human-audit pathway, and we apply it to three parallel physics worlds: a single-equation counterfactual world (

F=mv

), a historical framework (Aristotelian mechanics), and a four-domain counterfactual world (Decay World). Across Claude Opus 4.7, GPT-5.5, and Gemini 3.1 Pro, the three worlds yield composite PASS rates are 6/15, 6/15, and 0/15 respectively (content

\land

structural for

F=mv

and Aristotelian, content axis only for Decay World where the structural axis is out of scope). The most pointed empirical pattern is a qualitative-versus-quantitative asymmetry: in Decay World, models almost never predict the wrong direction of change, but frequently compute the wrong ratio by slipping back to standard-physics relations. The protocol also surfaces two methodology findings: LLM-judge reliability does not transfer across frameworks, and Stage 4 self-review is weak in every framework, with the model's own review wrongly reporting no earlier error in at least two-thirds of the trials that actually contained one. We release the full prompts, responses, verdicts, and audit records.

Dong Zhang

LLM Evaluation Physical Reasoning Counterfactual Reasoning in Language Models Language Model Self-Assessment Counterfactual Reasoning

Jun 30, 2026cs.CL

SEFORA: Student Essays with Feedback Corpus and LLM Feedback Evaluation Framework

Effective writing feedback is among the strongest drivers of student learning, yet producing it at scale is labor-intensive. LLMs offer a natural path to scaling writing support, but two gaps stand in the way: few public corpora capture how instructors actually deliver feedback in real classrooms, and no reliable method measures whether generated feedback aligns with what an instructor would write. We address both. SEFORA is a public corpus pairing instructor inline feedback with assignment prompts, rubrics, scores, and multi-draft revisions across various college writing genres, comprising 564 drafts and 8,240 instructor annotations. UniMatch is a reference-based evaluation framework for open-ended generation: it segments feedback into feedback units, scores their semantic correspondence under instructor-derived criteria, and aligns them via optimal matching to yield interpretable precision, recall, and F1. Across 74 experimental configurations spanning multiple LLMs, no setting exceeds 0.4 F1. UniMatch reveals that models struggle to identify the feedback instructors would prioritize, and performance degrades as models generate more.

Shayan Peyghambari Oskoui, Norah Almousa, Zhaoyi Joey Hou +5

University of Pittsburgh

LLM Evaluation Language Model Generation Evaluation

Jun 30, 2026cs.AI

Seed2.0 Model Card: Towards Intelligence Frontier for Real-World Complexity

We present Seed2.0, a model series that takes a meaningful step toward solving complex, real-world tasks. Our approach begins with identifying users' genuine needs and constructing a reliable, forward-looking evaluation system by selecting and abstracting benchmarks grounded in these needs and in realistic, complex scenarios. Guided by this evaluation system, Seed2.0 targets two persistent challenges, long-tail knowledge and complex instruction following, substantially improving the model's reliability on intricate, long-horizon tasks. Beyond these, Seed2.0 delivers world-leading reasoning intelligence, visual understanding, and search capabilities that address the most common needs of a broad user base. Through extensive real-world use cases documented in this model card, we demonstrate that Seed2.0 begins to exhibit the ability to handle initial complex real-world tasks, delivering greater value to hundreds of millions of users.

Bytedance Seed

Bytedance Seed

LLM Evaluation Instruction Following LLM Reliability LLM Reasoning Large Reasoning Models

Jun 30, 2026cs.CL

When LLMs Read Tables Carelessly: Measuring and Reducing Data Referencing Errors

While large language models (LLMs) perform well on table tasks, they still make data referencing errors (DREs), i.e., incorrectly citing or omitting table values, despite understanding the table structure. Beyond final-answer accuracy, DREs directly compromise the correctness and reliability of intermediate reasoning steps. Yet prior studies have only offered limited, small-scale analyses. In this work, we present the first systematic evaluation of tabular data referencing errors across different models and tasks. Our results show that DREs occur across all tested models (1.7B to 20B parameters). Furthermore, we demonstrate that incorporating data referencing as a critic significantly improves answer accuracy up to 12.0%, through critic-based filtering and rejection sampling. Finally, we trained a lightweight 4B-parameter critic model that achieves an average F1 score of 78.2% in detecting both in-distribution and out-of-distribution DREs, and effectively assists inference for larger models.

Yuqing Yang, Qi Zhu, Zhen Han +5

University of Southern California · AWS AI Labs

LLM Evaluation LLM Grounding LLM Reliability

Jun 30, 2026cs.AI

CDR-Bench: Evaluating Faithful Execution of Compositional, Order-Sensitive Data Refinement Recipes

Data refinement involves executing multi-step recipes over evolving text states, where both composition and execution order of processing operators determine the outcome. While existing benchmarks either isolate text editing or entangle it with code and tool execution, it remains unclear whether LLMs can directly and faithfully execute these compositional, order-sensitive data refinement recipes. To fill this gap, we introduce CDR-Bench, a comprehensive benchmark featuring 3,462 high-quality tasks spanning four real-world data refinement domains and 29 distinct operators. Our benchmark evaluates models across atomic, order-agnostic, and order-sensitive settings, leveraging deterministic reference outputs to enable exact evaluation. Experiments on 10+ state-of-the-art LLMs reveal consistent failure patterns: performance degrades sharply in compositional settings, and order-sensitive recipe success collapses. These findings underline that current LLMs lack the procedural faithfulness required for reliable compositional data refinement.

Yuchen Huang, Xiang Li, Zhenqing Ling +5

1HKUST · 2NUS · 3Tongyi Lab , Alibaba Group

LLM Evaluation Instruction Following LLM Reliability

Jun 30, 2026cs.AI

Benchmarking Large Language Models on Floating-Point Error Classification

This paper investigates the capability of Large Language Models (LLMs) to detect and classify floating-point errors statically in software code. We introduce InterFLOPBench, a benchmark of 90 C kernels with 1 130 test samples designed to evaluate LLMs across six categories of floating-point error: cancellation, comparison, division by zero, overflow, underflow and NaN, compared across 14 LLMs. The evaluation framework treats floating-point error detection as a multi-label classification problem and employs the F1-score metric to measure performance. Results demonstrate that latest models (Qwen 3 32b, Gemini 2.5 Flash, Phi 4 Reasoning, DeepSeek R1T2, and gpt-oss 20b and 120b) achieve a performance greater than 0.88 overall F1-score. Performance varies between error categories, between explicit operations such as division by zero (Average F1-score: 0.8479) and more subtle numerical phenomena such as underflow (Average F1-score: 0.6059) and cancellation (Average F1-score: 0.6164).

Lisa Taldir, Muhammad Ahmad Saeed, David Defour +2

LI-PaRAD · Université de Perpignan via Domitia, Perpignan, France · Université Paris-Saclay, UVSQ, France +1

LLM Evaluation Static Code Analysis Code Language Models

Jun 30, 2026cs.CL

Can LLMs Imagine Moral Alternatives Beyond Binary Dilemmas?

As LLMs increasingly serve as moral advisors and agents, they must address conflicts between competing values. Yet prior work on moral dilemmas overlooks a central aspect of human moral cognition: imagining alternatives beyond the given options. We introduce MoralAltDataset, comprising 307 Advisor and AI-facing Agent dilemmas augmented with compromise and reframed alternatives. We compare human and LLM judgments in binary and four-option settings. Across human participants and 15 LLMs, aggregate moral choice distributions differ substantially between the two settings, with compromise often preferred over either original binary option. Results show value shifts and stronger human-LLM agreement on alternatives. Source-stratified results reveal a descriptive gap: human alternative-selection rates are similar across authoring sources, whereas LLMs select GPT-5-authored alternatives substantially more often. We then compare human-authored alternatives with outputs from three representative LLMs through pairwise preference and expert-based evaluations. Alternatives from these LLMs are generally preferred and better satisfy fine-grained structural and ethical criteria, while revealing a trade-off between structural quality and practical feasibility. Our dataset is available here: https://huggingface.co/datasets/jongchanch/MoralAltDataset, and our project page is here: https://jongchanchoi.com/moral-imagination

Jongchan Choi, Nari Yang, Sung Soo Park +4

1Korea University · 2XenoStep AI · 3Hankuk University of Foreign Studies

LLM Evaluation Moral Reasoning in Language Models Human-AI Decision Making Moral Reasoning

Jun 30, 2026cs.CL

Truth or Sophistry? LoFa: A Benchmark for LLM Robustness Against Logical Fallacies

Large Language Models (LLMs) exhibit strong semantic capabilities, yet their resilience to manipulative linguistic patterns such as logical fallacies remains underexplored. Prior work has primarily examined whether LLMs can identify or classify fallacies, leaving their robustness against fallacious persuasion insufficiently studied. To address this gap, we introduce LoFa (Logical Fallacy), a comprehensive benchmark for evaluating LLM robustness against fallacies. LoFa is constructed through a multi-agent pipeline that pairs factual questions with fallacious arguments, and is accompanied by a multi-round debate framework for assessing model resilience under sustained adversarial persuasion. To disentangle fallacy robustness from a model's inherent knowledge limitations, we further propose Logical Fallacy Resistance at k (LFR@k), a metric that quantifies resistance to fallacious attacks. Experiments show that LLMs exhibit varying levels of robustness across different fallacy types, revealing distinct vulnerability profiles among models.

Xudong Shen, Li Yuan, Ye Chen +3

Shenzhen International Graduate School, Tsinghua University · South China University of Technology

LLM Evaluation Adversarial Attacks on LLMs Language Model Robustness

Jun 29, 2026cs.SE

Prompting GPT-5 on Scrum Certification Questions: An Empirical Accuracy Study

Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly used in Agile Software Development for documentation, coaching, and training. As practitioners adopt these tools to prepare for certifications such as Professional Scrum Master (PSM), a key question is whether LLMs can reliably reason about Scrum, a framework with normative, well-defined rules described in the Scrum Guide (2020). This paper examines how different prompt techniques affect the factual accuracy of LLM responses to Scrum certification-style questions. A dataset of 993 validated PSM-aligned questions was answered by GPT-5 using three techniques: zero-shot, chain-of-thought, and with-source citation. All prompts achieved certification-level accuracy above 85%, with the citation-based variant performing best (89.1%) and yielding the lowest error rate. Correct answers concentrated in well-defined topics, such as \emph{Definition of Done}, Events, and Product Backlog Management, and in single-answer multiple-choice items, while multi-select questions and more interpretive areas, such as Scrum Team and Product Value, were less stable. Among questions where at least one prompt failed (16.2%), errors clustered into misalignment with the Scrum Guide (28%), content outside its scope (34%), and outdated or biased interpretations (38%). Overall, prompt techniques produced modest but consistent improvements, particularly in reducing misinterpretation and version drift, supporting more reliable use of LLMs in Agile learning and certification preparation.

Mirko Perkusich, Danyllo Albuquerque, João Paiva +6

ISE Group, VIRTUS/UFCG, Campina Grande, Brazil · Federal University of Campina Grande, Brazil

Software Engineering LLM Evaluation LLM Prompting Question Answering