arXiv AI

PeopleSearchBench: A Multi-Dimensional Benchmark for Evaluating AI-Powered People Search Platforms

arXiv:2603. 27476v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: AI-powered people search platforms are increasingly used in recruiting, sales prospecting, and professional networking, yet no widely accepted benchmark exists for evaluating their performance.

arXiv AI
Jun 12

DailyReport: An Open-ended Benchmark for Evaluating Search Agents on Daily Search Tasks

arXiv:2606. 12871v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Search Agents (SAs) typically leverage large language models (LLMs) to support complex information-seeking tasks by autonomously exploring web sources and synthesizing information into comprehensive responses.

By Jingxuan Han, Wei Liu, Mingyang Zhu, Youpeng Wang, Ziwen Wang, Lin Qiu, Xuezhi Cao, Xunliang Cai, Zheren Fu, Licheng Zhang, Zhendong Mao
arXiv AI
Jun 2

NBQ: Next-Best-Question for Dynamic Profiling

arXiv:2606. 00809v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Many real-world conversational settings for knowledge discovery, including podcasts, hiring screens, and marketplaces, require a purpose-driven understanding of a person.

By Yimin Shi, Clarice Wang, Haixun Wang, Xiaokui Xiao
arXiv AI
Jun 17

RubricsTree: Scalable and Evolving Open-Ended Evaluation of Personal Health Agents across Health Memory and Medical Skills

arXiv:2606. 18203v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: The LLM-empowered personal health agents with user health (sensor) metrics have offered a promising pathway to alleviate global disparities in healthcare access.

By Weizhi Zhang, Zechen Li, Hamid Palangi, Ben Graef, A. Ali Heydari, Simon A. Lee, Salman Rahman, Ray Luo, Zeinab Esmaeilpour, Erik Schenck, Chloe Zhang, Yamin Li, Menglian Zhou, Philip S. Yu, Daniel McDuff, Lindsey Sunden, Mark Malhotra, Shwetak Patel, Ahmed A. Metwally
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