arXiv AI

NuclearQAv2: A Structured Benchmark for Evaluating Domain-Science Competence in Large Language Models

arXiv:2606. 27047v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated strong performance across a wide range of tasks, but ensuring their reliability in highly technical domains remains a significant challenge.

arXiv AI
Jun 10

RankLLM: Weighted Ranking of LLMs by Quantifying Question Difficulty

arXiv:2602. 12424v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Benchmarks establish a standardized evaluation framework to systematically assess the performance of large language models (LLMs), facilitating objective comparisons and driving advancements in the field.

By Ziqian Zhang, Xingjian Hu, Yue Huang, Kai Zhang, Ruoxi Chen, Yixin Liu, Qingsong Wen, Kaidi Xu, Xiangliang Zhang, Neil Zhenqiang Gong, Lichao Sun
arXiv Machine Learning
Sep 21

Semantic Calibration Prevails Where Token Confidence Fails: Benchmarking Long-Form Scientific QA

The paper presents the first large‑scale benchmark for uncertainty quantification (UQ) calibration in long‑form scientific question answering, evaluating four UQ methods on 685,000 responses from up to 20 large language models across seven datasets. It shows that instruction tuning leads to token‑level probability polarization, undermining token‑level uncertainty signals, while reasoning model families differ in how they handle this effect. Only semantic consistency—consistency of the final answer—provides well‑calibrated outputs, demonstrating that semantic calibration remains robust in multi‑step, dependency‑rich reasoning.

By Philip M\"uller, Nicholas Popovi\v{c}, Michael F\"arber, Peter Steinbach
arXiv AI
Aug 26

Omanic: Towards Step-wise Evaluation of Multi-hop Reasoning in Large Language Models

arXiv:2603.16654v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Evaluating the reasoning abilities of large language models (LLMs) solely from final answers can obscure failures in intermediate steps, espe...

By Xiaojie Gu, Sherry T. Tong, Aosong Feng, Sophia Simeng Han, Jinghui Lu, Yingjian Chen, Yusuke Iwasawa, Yutaka Matsuo, Chanjun Park, Rex Ying, Irene Li
arXiv AI
Jun 24

Benchmarking LLMs' Mathematical Reasoning with Unseen Random Variables Questions

arXiv:2501. 11790v5 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Recent studies have raised significant concerns regarding the reliability of current mathematics benchmarks, highlighting issues such as simplistic design and potential data contamination.

By Zijin Hong, Hao Wu, Su Dong, Junnan Dong, Yilin Xiao, Yujing Zhang, Zhu Wang, Feiran Huang, Linyi Li, Hongxia Yang, Xiao Huang
arXiv AI
Jun 26

Ask, Don't Judge: Binary Questions for Interpretable LLM Evaluation and Self-Improvement

arXiv:2606. 27226v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Evaluating LLM outputs remains a major bottleneck in NLP: human evaluation is expensive and slow, lexical metrics correlate poorly with human judgments on open-ended generation, and holistic LLM judges often produce opaque scores that are hard to debug.

By Sangwoo Cho, Kushal Chawla, Pengshan Cai, Zefang Liu, Chenyang Zhu, Shi-Xiong Zhang, Sambit Sahu
arXiv Computation and Language
4d ago

Layer-Informed Fine-Tuning via Three-Stage Functional Segmentation of LLMs

The paper proposes Layer-Informed Fine-Tuning (LIFT), a method that identifies and updates only the most functionally critical layers of large language models (LLMs) using a bottleneck identification mechanism based on sensitivity analysis. By focusing on layers that handle conceptualization, reasoning, and textualization, LIFT aims to accelerate training and enhance performance on reasoning tasks. Experiments demonstrate that this selective fine-tuning approach both speeds up the training process and yields significant performance gains.

By Junning Shao, Siwei Wang, Zhixuan Fang