arXiv:2608. 00915v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Uplift modeling (conditional-average-treatment-effect estimation) drives personalized targeting, yet published uplift benchmarks frequently disagree on which estimator performs best; we show the disagreement is substantially about metrics, not models.
arXiv:2608. 12489v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Organizations decide whom to treat under a budget and want to know what a targeting rule would have earned before deploying it.
The paper investigates how language‑model judges can make version‑dependent errors when evaluating upgraded agents. Using 35 public coding‑agent submissions, two customer‑service agents, and over a thousand expert‑labeled trajectories, the authors show that fixed judges often reject task‑conditioned error invariance and can incorrectly approve failed patches, especially as agent capability increases. Paired audits of current outputs reduce interval width only marginally, and the study concludes that independent human patch review is still necessary.
arXiv:2606. 23767v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Headline accuracies on the Tuebingen cause-effect pairs are routinely compared across papers even though each is measured under its authors' own protocol -- different pair subsets, weightings, model-selection, and decision rates.
arXiv:2609.24128v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Judge-specific sensitivity is useful for aggregating pairwise LLM evaluations, but its interpretation depends on which systematic presentation effect...
Judge-specific sensitivity is useful for aggregating pairwise LLM evaluations, but its interpretation depends on which systematic presentation effects the ranking model includes. We introduce OSCAR, a...
GAUGE is a new offline protocol that evaluates whether the common practice of using an LLM-as-a-judge to rank task‑oriented agents actually aligns with a verifiable reward. Across 25 agents from six providers on two benchmarks, GAUGE finds that user satisfaction scores are largely uncorrelated with task success, and that the judge’s ranking loses precision when agents are closely matched in performance. The study highlights a gap between ranking validity and construct validity in current evaluation practices.
The paper proposes a scalable, automated method for auditing candidate‑job matching systems for demographic bias. It employs large‑language‑model agents to generate neutral resumes, injects controlled demographic variations, ranks candidates with a fine‑tuned embedding model, and evaluates nine fairness metrics across counterfactual, group‑fairness, and merit‑aware families, producing a composite risk report. Experiments on a small corpus show that single‑score audits miss nuanced issues, underscoring the need for multi‑metric evaluation and LLM‑generated audits as a low‑cost complement to human reviews.
The paper introduces a counterfactual tool ranking framework that accounts for authority, historical support, and estimation nuances. Using eleven enterprise-inspired tools, synthetic and real-world experiments on the Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard, the study compares direct regression and doubly robust (DR) methods, finding that DR performs better in shifted environments while direct regression excels in linear settings. The authors also evaluate Qwen2.5 models on held-out tasks, analyze policy differences under missing support, and present a falsifiable evaluation method with publicly available evidence.
arXiv:2607. 20864v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Position bias in multiple-choice LLM evaluation is widely cited as a confound in capability comparisons, but published measurements rely on single answer-order shuffles whose results confound the bias signal with content-level noise and sampling stochasticity.
arXiv:2607. 07023v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Supervised fine-tuning (SFT) is often treated as a capability-adaptation step, while alignment is attributed to later preference optimization or reinforcement learning.
arXiv:2607. 08065v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: LLM-as-judge (Zheng et al.
arXiv:2609.37858v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Many localized large language model (LLM) unlearning methods select a small parameter subset from a localization signal and keep it fixed during optimi...