arXiv:2607. 05031v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used to produce test oracles, the part of a test that decides whether observed behavior is correct.
arXiv:2608.30581v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are used as post hoc explainers of sequential decision-making policies, producing natural-language explanations of why an...
arXiv:2606. 27383v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used as research assistants, yet it remains unclear whether they can calibrate research takeaways to the strength and scope of the supporting evidence.
Large language models (LLMs) are used as post hoc explainers of sequential decision-making policies, producing natural-language explanations of why an action was chosen. However, LLMs often generate p...
arXiv:2607. 14707v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models routinely produce fluent answers to single-shot prompts, yet deploying them as reliable components of a domain decision system is substantially harder.
arXiv:2609.25938v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: A conformal abstention certificate for text-to-SQL is only as truthful as the correctness labels it is calibrated on. The uncertainty pipelines that re...
arXiv:2607. 08731v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: National language models are becoming publicly funded epistemic infrastructure.
arXiv:2608. 02621v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Legal benchmarks typically score final answers even when models also state legal authority.
The paper introduces three retrieval methods for Polish statutory law that use language‑model annotations attached to articles as surrogates. The methods—ASCR, ASCR‑H, and DTF—vary in cost and quality, with ASCR‑H achieving the highest rank‑one accuracy on bar exam questions, while DTF offers competitive performance with lower latency and cost. Extensive evaluation against 14 baselines on 300 exam questions demonstrates significant improvements in head‑rank accuracy and discusses limitations such as coverage asymmetry and negative results for lemmatisation, pseudo‑relevance feedback, and query rewriting.
arXiv:2608. 07946v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Text-to-SQL benchmarks ship schemas whose column names already say what the columns mean.
arXiv:2606. 28430v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Benchmarks are widely used to evaluate task completion by Large Language Models (LLMs), but this approach has accumulated construction-validity problems, and a passing score may not show whether the requested task was delivered.
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:2607. 05682v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: LLM systems for scientific discovery increasingly assist with ideation, literature synthesis, experiment planning, and report generation, but the first research question they propose can remain difficult to audit: it may sound plausible without exposing the mechanism, falsifier, or assumption that a scientist should inspect.