SHELF is a Python system that creates controlled benchmark data and evaluation tasks for libraries and archives, using labelled taxonomies, writing specifications, and a generation budget. It generates 62,899 model-written documents based on Library of Congress vocabularies and supports tasks such as classification, clustering, retrieval, pair classification, and instruction retrieval. The release compares various methods—including TF, TF-IDF, BM25, popular encoders, and zero-shot decoders—showing that sparse methods remain competitive on classification and that SHELF can vary bibliographic facets independently while generating new, verifiably unseen documents.
arXiv:2606. 04382v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Automated subject cataloging assigns controlledvocabulary headings to bibliographic records, but LCSH has no standard public benchmark.
By Kwok Leong Tang
arXiv:2506.17585v4 Announce Type: replace
Abstract: Large language models can answer questions correctly and still hallucinate their citations. Most citation systems address this by retrieving docume...
By Yukun Huang, Sanxing Chen, Jian Pei, Manzil Zaheer, Bhuwan Dhingra
arXiv:2608.22817v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Industrial technical reports contain high-value knowledge for maintenance, troubleshooting, and product engineering, but their heterogeneous structure...
By Parsa Bakhtiari, Hassan Bashiri, Alireza Khalilipour, Masoud Nasiripour, Moharram Challenger
arXiv:2608.18097v2 Announce Type: replace
Abstract: We present FrenchNews-7, a cross-publisher France-based French-language news editorial desk classification benchmark combining a large multi-outlet...
By Amr Sobhy
arXiv:2606. 12451v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models deployed as agents over large tool catalogs face a critical tool-retrieval bottleneck.
By Ashutosh Hathidara, Sai Shruthi Sistla, Sebastian Schreiber, Sahil Bansal
The Writerslogic team participated in the CLEF 2026 SimpleText shared task, tackling both text simplification (Task 1) and complexity spotting (Task 2). For simplification, they built a multi‑candidate pipeline with GPT‑4o‑mini, selecting the best candidate via a reference‑free heuristic, and their Claude Sonnet 4 submission achieved a SARI of 47.43 and BLEU of 14.21, ranking third overall on the Task 1 leaderboard. For complexity spotting, they fine‑tuned a DeBERTa‑v3‑large NLI model on 350 K labeled pairs, achieving a macro F1 of 0.8081 (0.8085 in an ensemble) on binary over‑generation identification and 0.804 accuracy on multi‑class error classification, placing them second among unique teams.
By David L. Condrey
arXiv:2608.21792v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Document classification in regulated industries is constrained by data residency, limited cold-start labels, scarce review capacity, and costly model-g...
By Shangxuan Tian, Yanhui Chen, Carlos Queiroz
arXiv:2606. 28367v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) is routinely extended with methods meant to improve retrieval: query expansion, hierarchical and cross-document summarization, graph-based expansion, per-query routing, rank fusion, and corrective re-retrieval.
By Sadanand Singh, Allam Reddy, Manan Chopra
arXiv:2610.02516v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Zero-shot classifiers are useful for routing user requests to specialized LLM tasks, but scoring every request against a large candidate set is expen...
By Haifeng Wu, Srinivasan Manoharan, Jian Wan, Fangbo Tu, Junhua Zhao, Xin Chen
arXiv:2607. 04088v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: LongEval-Sci evaluates scientific retrieval under collection change, where a system should be effective on the current corpus and remain usable as documents accumulate over time.
By Yingdong Yang, Haijian Wu
arXiv:2607. 16848v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Long-term memory is becoming a core component of LLM agents, but most memory benchmarks evaluate conversations or compact summaries, while research agents need to restore evidence from full scientific papers.
By Maksim Sheverev, David Finkelstein, Sergey Nikolenko