arXiv:2606. 09809v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: AI evaluation results are produced at scale but reported inconsistently across leaderboards, model cards, benchmark papers, and company blogs.
arXiv:2602. 18446v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Users increasingly rely on Large Language Models (LLMs) for Deep Research, using them to synthesize diverse sources into structured reports that support understanding and action.
arXiv:2606. 14516v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: AI evaluations are widely used for testing and understanding progress.
arXiv:2608. 13840v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Audits of generative AI (GenAI) systems often summarize behavior as a reported rate: how often the audited system complies with policy.
arXiv:2606. 07936v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Human evaluation plays a critical role in assessing the quality of generated text.
arXiv:2606. 29784v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Reliable generative AI models critically rely on expert human annotations to evaluate output quality, yet these "gold" labels are expensive to collect and limited in quantity.
arXiv:2607. 28801v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Benchmark datasets are central to evaluating Large Language Models (LLMs), yet they are typically conceived as monolithic tasks, obscuring substantial variation in the demands of individual samples.
arXiv:2606. 00033v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: While mechanistic interpretability (MI) has produced important insights into neural network internals, the field has yet to establish a standardized system to audit experiments.
arXiv:2606. 11337v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Scientific AI agents increasingly retrieve evidence, reason across sources, and synthesize conclusions used in consequential decisions.
arXiv:2606. 16974v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: The reproducibility crisis has directed the AI research community toward improving documentation practices.
arXiv:2606. 19749v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: A new class of agentic review systems are emerging as a remedy to the pressure placed on peer review systems by AI-assisted research, but it is unclear how they should be evaluated.
arXiv:2606. 31651v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Recent automated research systems show that language-model agents can generate hypotheses, run experiments, and write complete manuscripts, but most evidence still comes from selected examples, human-framed topics, or a few pre-defined research tasks.
arXiv:2607. 26512v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: AI agents can draft claims faster than authors can check whether the cited or retrieved evidence supports them.