arXiv AI

FlavourBench: Ranking Frontier Language Models with Executable Culinary Ground Truth

FlavourBench is an automated benchmark that evaluates language models on culinary tasks by providing a versioned, executable ground truth system. Each task presents eight ingredients and asks the model to propose a three‑ingredient portfolio, with all 56 possible portfolios scored by the Epicure system before model execution. The benchmark assesses 27 frontier endpoints across 534 tasks, yielding a FlavourBench Score that averages frozen task scores across families, and includes extensive statistical analysis and reproducible data releases.

arXiv AI
2d ago

FlavourBench: Executable Culinary Reward Maps for Language Model Evaluation and Post-Training

FlavourBench is a new evaluation framework that replaces missing answer keys with dense reward maps generated from a versioned culinary environment. Each task requires selecting a three‑ingredient portfolio from eight options, and all 56 possible portfolios are scored by Epicure before model inference. The authors evaluate 27 endpoints across 534 tasks, perform statistical tests on 351 model contrasts, and conduct a preregistered post‑training study showing that LoRA fine‑tuning on Qwen3‑0.6B improves performance on 84 anchor‑disjoint maps by 13.30 points.

By Josef Chen (Independent Researcher), Erim Hayretci (Imperial College London)
arXiv AI
Jun 3

CoEval: Ranking Language Models for Custom Tasks Without Labeled Data or Trustworthy Benchmarks

arXiv:2606. 03650v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Choosing or ranking language models for a specific application is hardest when no task-specific labeled data exists, and standard public benchmarks cannot be trusted, their items having likely leaked into pretraining, so scores reflect memorization rather than fitness.

By Alexander Apartsin, Yehudit Aperstein
arXiv AI
Aug 20

Pairwise Ranking Outperforms Single-Action RL for Offline Explanation Selection: A Practical Lesson

The paper presents a cost‑effective approach for industrial explainable‑recommendation systems by decoupling explanation generation from selection. Candidate explanations are pre‑generated using six prompt styles and two commodity LLMs, then a lightweight CPU‑resident selector (e.g., LambdaRank) chooses the best one at request time, achieving sub‑100 ms latency without GPUs. Experiments on a 2,958‑pair Google Local subset and a 300‑pair MovieLens‑1M split show that pairwise ranking methods outperform single‑action RL baselines, while KG‑path selectors achieve near‑perfect user satisfaction scores.

By Tanay Chowdhury, Saeideh Shahrokh Esfahani
arXiv AI
2d ago

AgentJudgeBench: A Multi-Difficulty Benchmark for Evaluating LLM Judges on Agentic Tool-Calling

AgentJudgeBench is a new benchmark that evaluates the reliability of large language model (LLM) judges on agentic tool‑calling tasks involving workflow directed acyclic graphs (DAGs). It contains 3,808 instances across six DAG topologies and three difficulty tiers, tested with five generators (3B–70B open‑weight models and GPT‑5.4) and six judges (20B to frontier scale) under both paired‑with‑and‑without‑ground‑truth conditions. The study finds that judge alignment degrades with task difficulty, ground‑truth exposure can sometimes hurt alignment, and structured evaluation rubrics provide modest improvements, revealing a structural ceiling that model capacity alone cannot surpass.

By Abhigya Verma, Amit Kumar Saha, Seganrasan Subramanian, Sai Harshitha Aluru
arXiv AI
Jul 24

DynamicMCPBench: A Trace-Grounded, Effect-Scored Benchmark for LLM Agents over Live MCP Servers

arXiv:2607. 20531v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language model (LLM) agents are increasingly deployed over Model Context Protocol (MCP) servers, yet the benchmarks used to evaluate them score the final answer or a fixed "ground-truth" list of tools, both of which are fragile once the underlying data is live and stateful.

By Jerzy Kami\'nski, Ilya Galyukshev, Artem Kuznetsov, Sergey Chuprin, Kirill Redko, Aidar Shumbalov, Anna Kalyuzhnaya