arXiv:2608. 15630v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: The rapid development and growing deployment of large language models (LLMs) have made it increasingly important to understand their capabilities.
By Alona Strugatski, Licol Zeinfeld, Giora Alexandron
The study examines whether the latent factors that explain large language model (LLM) performance correspond to human‑interpretable cognitive constructs. Using exploratory factor analysis on responses from humans and six LLMs in quantitative reasoning and chemistry, subject‑matter experts could interpret most human‑derived factors but struggled to ascribe meaning to LLM‑derived factors, especially in quantitative reasoning and only partially in chemistry. The results suggest that LLMs often rely on statistically opaque mechanisms distinct from human reasoning.
By Alona Strugatski, Licol Zeinfeld, Jason Cooper, Shelley Rap, Gil Schwarts, Giora Alexandron
arXiv:2608.30044v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Language models are commonly compared by averaging scores across a benchmark list with equal weight. Such lists grow through publication outside an exp...
By Jhen-Ke Lin
arXiv:2512. 07019v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: The proliferation of Large Language Models (LLMs) necessitates valid evaluation methods to provide guidance for both downstream applications and actionable future improvements.
By Zhiyu Xu, Jia Liu, Yixin Wang, Yuqi Gu
arXiv:2604. 07102v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Activation-based steering enables inference-time personalization of large language models, but its effects in educational applications are not well understood.
By Yongchao Wu, Aron Henriksson
arXiv:2607. 14109v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Probing the capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs) and building robust solutions for Multiple-Choice Question Answering (MCQA) remain central challenges in natural language understanding.
By Inder Preet, Shuxin Lin, Dhaval Patel
arXiv:2609.09372v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Although MMLU is widely adopted as a benchmark for calibrating general AI capabilities, we psychometrically demonstrate that its aggregate score prim...
By Dana Paquin, Riddhiman Jain
arXiv:2604. 19139v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: As Large Language Models (LLMs) continue to evolve through alignment techniques such as Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) and Constitutional AI, a growing and increasingly conspicuous phenomenon has emerged: the proliferation of verbal tics--repetitive, formulaic linguistic patterns that pervade model outputs.
By Shuai Wu, Xue Li, Yanna Feng, Yufang Li, Zhijun Wang, Ran Wang
arXiv:2601. 22588v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are widely used as reference-free evaluators via prompting, but this "LLM-as-a-Judge" paradigm is costly, opaque, and sensitive to prompt design.
By Zhuochun Li, Yong Zhang, Ming Li, Yuelyu Ji, Yiming Zeng, Ning Cheng, Yun Zhu, Yanmeng Wang, Shaojun Wang, Jing Xiao, Daqing He
arXiv:2607. 06940v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: The remarkable performance of large language models (LLMs) in linguistic tasks underscores an urgent need for comprehensive evaluation of their response quality.
By Yiming Gai, Junde Lu, Xuefei Huang
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.
By Philipp D. Siedler, Jordan Sassoon
arXiv:2605. 23055v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Frontier language models sometimes recognize that they are being evaluated and adjust their behavior, undermining validity of benchmark results.
By Changling Li, Terry Jingchen Zhang, Jie Zhang, Zhijing Jin, Sahar Abdelnabi, Maksym Andriushchenko