arXiv AI
Jul 3
GroundEval: A Deterministic Replacement for LLM-as-Judge in Stateful Agent Evaluation
arXiv:2606. 22737v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Before letting an agent operate over real context, can you prove it used the right evidence?
GroundEval: A Deterministic Replacement for LLM-as-Judge in Stateful Agent Evaluation
Before letting an agent operate over real context, can you prove it used the right evidence? GroundEval turns that question into a deterministic test of what the agent searched, fetched, cited, and was permitted to access.
Related stories
arXiv AI
Aug 5
Before Reasoning Can Fail: Pre-Evidence Procedural Failures in Agentic RAG
arXiv:2608. 02011v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Agentic retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) systems can fail before evidence-conditioned reasoning is tested: an agent may retrieve candidate snippets but finalize without inspecting them.
arXiv AI
Jul 17
L-MARS: Legal Multi-Agent System with Agentic Search and Citation-Faithfulness Audit
arXiv:2509. 00761v4 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Large language models are increasingly deployed for legal question answering, where evaluations typically focus on multiple-choice accuracy.
arXiv AI
5d ago
ReflectFact: Self-Reflective Agents for Improving Comprehension and Reasoning in Multi-Hop Fact Verification
arXiv:2608. 12877v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Multi-hop fact verification, which verifies claims by reasoning over multiple pieces of evidence, is critical for combating misinformation on social media yet remains highly challenging.
arXiv AI
Jun 4
From Agent Traces to Trust: Evidence Tracing and Execution Provenance in LLM Agents
arXiv:2606. 04990v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language model (LLM)-based agents increasingly solve complex tasks by interacting with external tools, retrieval systems, memory modules, environments, and other agents.
arXiv AI
Jul 29
When Do Agent Loops Mistake Stagnation for Progress? Self-Evaluation Bias and Externally Grounded Verification in Long-Running Autonomous LLM Agent Loops
arXiv:2607. 25152v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Long-running autonomous agents plan, act, and judge their own completion without human intervention.
arXiv AI
Jun 10
The Confident Liar: Diagnosing Multi-Agent Debate with Log-Probabilities and LLM-as-Judge
arXiv:2606. 10296v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Multi-agent debate systems are typically evaluated only on whether the final answer is correct, overlooking the quality of the intermediate reasoning that debate is designed to produce.
arXiv AI
Aug 12
Auditing Automated Evaluation, Error Propagation, and Runtime Mitigation in Tool-Using Language Agents
arXiv:2604. 16706v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Automated evaluation of tool-using large language model (LLM) agents is widely assumed to be reliable, yet this assumption is rarely validated against human annotation.
arXiv AI
Jun 16
From Agent Traces to Trust: A Survey of Evidence Tracing and Execution Provenance in LLM Agents
arXiv:2606. 04990v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large language model (LLM)-based agents are evolving from passive text generators into autonomous systems capable of planning, tool use, retrieval, memory access, environmental interaction, and multi-agent collaboration.
arXiv AI
Jul 7
Agent Step Value: State-Transition Measurement with State-Grounded LLM Evaluators
arXiv:2607. 04419v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Most agent evaluations collapse a multi-step trace into a final answer, a success flag, or a trajectory-level score.
arXiv AI
Jul 10
Two Axes of LLM Abstention: Answer Correctness and Question Answerability
arXiv:2607. 08456v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: A model should refuse two different things: answers it would get wrong, and questions it should not answer at all, such as unanswerable ones or ones resting on a false premise.
arXiv AI
2d ago
Inducing Reward-Free Judging Rubrics that Reduce Over-Crediting in Agent Evaluation
arXiv:2608. 13564v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Evaluating language-model agents at scale increasingly relies on a second language model as an automatic judge, because the gold signal, an executable environment reward, is expensive, slow, or unavailable at deployment time.