arXiv Machine Learning

LatentMD: Benchmarking Markdown Boundary Failures in LLM-Generated Text

arXiv Computation and Language
Sep 25

Combating Instruction Conflict via Energy-Driven Latent Conflict Detection

The paper introduces ELCD, a latent conflict detector that verifies LLM outputs after generation to catch instruction conflicts that static input checks miss. ELCD builds a hidden-state representation from the final-token embedding and the mean-pooled response embedding, then trains a pairwise margin ranking objective to distinguish compliant from drifting responses. Experiments on five large language models show ELCD outperforms baselines, boosting PR-AUC for Llama‑2‑7B by ~30 percentage points and cutting FPR95 for Mistral‑7B to 2.67%.

By Mingyu Ma, Yuxin Wu, Jingbo Wang, Tianxiao Huang, Leixin Sun, Xiaochuan Shi
arXiv AI
Aug 28

A Multi-Framework Comparison of Outline Stages in Long-Form Generation with LLMs

The paper presents a benchmark that compares seven long‑form generation frameworks across three granularities—single chapter, multi‑chapter, and whole book—using an anchor‑based LLM‑as‑a‑judge protocol to evaluate outlines directly. Results show no single framework dominates across all settings; performance depends on how well a framework’s output form matches the target granularity, with SuperWriter excelling in length‑constrained single‑chapter mode but losing advantage in whole‑book mode. The study finds only moderate correlation between outline and writing quality, supporting the idea that these two stages should be evaluated separately.

By Yifan Song
arXiv Machine Learning
Oct 23

Brittlebench: Quantifying LLM robustness via prompt sensitivity

The paper introduces Brittlebench, a framework and evaluation pipeline that measures how sensitive large language models (LLMs) are to prompt variations. By applying semantics‑preserving perturbations to popular benchmarks, the authors show that model performance can drop by up to 12% and that such perturbations can change model rankings in 63% of cases. The study finds that these input variations can explain up to half of the performance variance for a given model, underscoring the importance of robust evaluation methods.

By Angelika Romanou, Mark Ibrahim, Candace Ross, Kerem Oktar, Chantal Shaib, Samuel J. Bell, Anaelia Ovalle, Antoine Bosselut, Jesse Dodge, Koustuv Sinha, Adina Williams
arXiv AI
Aug 26

ToolRobustBench: Stage-Wise Perturbation Evaluation and Failure Diagnosis for Tool-Calling Agents

ToolRobustBench is a stage-wise diagnostic benchmark designed to evaluate and diagnose failures in tool‑calling agents, which are large language models that select tools, provide structured arguments, and interpret tool feedback. The benchmark aligns four perturbation families—tool‑interface, user‑intent, tool‑output/observation, and runtime‑environment—with the tool‑use pipeline, attributing failures to specific stages such as tool selection, schema grounding, argument binding, and feedback handling. Experiments across 15,456 instances, 7 models, and 16 local tools reveal that while overall performance is high, robustness degrades significantly, especially under tool‑output/observation perturbations, and mixed‑family perturbations produce non‑additive failure patterns.

By YiShan Zheng, Yuan Wu, Yi Chang
arXiv Machine Learning
Jun 9

IGenBench: Benchmarking the Reliability of Text-to-Infographic Generation

arXiv:2601. 04498v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Infographics are composite visual artifacts that combine data visualizations with textual and illustrative elements to communicate information.

By Yinghao Tang, Xueding Liu, Boyuan Zhang, Tingfeng Lan, Yupeng Xie, Jiale Lao, Yiyao Wang, Haoxuan Li, Tingting Gao, Bo Pan, Luoxuan Weng, Xiuqi Huang, Minfeng Zhu, Yingchaojie Feng, Yuyu Luo, Wei Chen