arXiv Computation and Language

Outdated numeric values from Norwegian statutes and regulations in a further-trained model and its base model: a preregistered paired comparison of Borealis 2 and Gemma 4

The study compares two Norwegian language models—Borealis 2, further‑trained from Gemma 4, and Gemma 4 itself—on how often they provide outdated numeric values from Norwegian statutes and regulations. Using the closed norregel benchmark, the models were evaluated on 503 primary items; Borealis 2 was outdated on 10 items and Gemma 4 on 11, a difference that is not statistically significant and falls within the pre‑registered smallest effect of interest. The only secondary measure that differed after Holm correction was the share of answers giving a value that took effect after the question date, with Gemma 4 giving such answers more often.

arXiv Computation and Language
Oct 22

norregel: a preregistered benchmark of dated numeric values in Norwegian law

The paper introduces *norregel*, a preregistered benchmark that tests language models on numeric values in Norwegian legal texts, including amounts, percentages, and age limits, each tied to a specific date. The benchmark contains 916 items extracted from Lovdata, allowing answers to be classified as correct, outdated, wrong, or uninterpretable. Two preregistered runs were conducted: the first showed mixed results across five models, while the second, involving eight models, supported the hypothesis that outdated answers are more common for values introduced after a model’s cutoff, though the robustness of this finding varied across sensitivity analyses.

By Eirik Botten Nicolaysen (EcoDeco AS)
arXiv Computation and Language
3d ago

NitiBench+: A Temporal Thai Legal Question Answering Benchmark Across 17 Domains

NitiBench+ is a Thai legal question‑answering benchmark that spans 17 domains and contains 1,670 items derived from real court decisions. Each item includes both the law text that was in force at the decision date and the current text, along with a retrieval corpus of every dated version of every Thai statute section. The benchmark evaluates models using the Thai Bar Council rubric, Bar‑standard score, and citation overlap, and it reveals that reading outdated or missing law significantly degrades performance.

By Pawitsapak Akarajaradwong, Sarana Nutanong, Chompakorn Chaksangchaichot
arXiv AI
Aug 11

Time Present and Time Past: Benchmarking Large Language Models on Temporally Evolving Document Understanding

arXiv:2608. 08512v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Evolving documents, such as laws, tax codes, and software documentation, are amended, replaced, and sometimes reverted over time, so a question has different correct answers at different dates.

By Mahbub E Sobhani, Md. Faiyaz Abdullah Sayeedi, Fahmid Hasan Chowdhury, Md Adnan Arefeen, Farig Sadeque, Md. Faizul Bari, Swakkhar Shatabda
arXiv AI
Sep 1

Benchmark Contamination: A Taxonomy Organized by Defeated Mitigation

The paper introduces a new taxonomy for benchmark contamination that categorizes leakage by the mitigation it defeats—direct, derivative, temporal, distributional, and acquired—covering both training‑time and evaluation‑time scenarios. It proposes a four‑field disclosure protocol to record contamination status alongside benchmark scores, and provides a JSON schema, validator, and examples. An empirical study of 41 documents using a pre‑registered instrument shows limited reporting of contamination types and variable reliability, highlighting gaps in current disclosure practices.

By Johanna Angulo, V\'ictor Yeste, Hector Espinos-Morato
arXiv AI
Oct 28

Scoring-Rule Sensitivity in LLM Evaluation: Evidence from Indian Financial Regulatory Text

The paper investigates how different scoring rules affect the ranking of large language models (LLMs) on the IndiaFinBench benchmark, which contains 406 expert‑annotated items covering regulatory interpretation, numerical reasoning, contradiction detection, and temporal reasoning. Using twelve LLMs evaluated under strict string‑matching, a cross‑model judge, and a composite regime, the authors find that model rankings vary dramatically across regimes, with no significant rank correlation (Spearman ρ = -0.273). Item‑level analysis reveals that a substantial portion of items are answered identically by all models, while a higher‑discrimination band isolates more challenging cases.

By Rajveer Singh Pall
arXiv AI
Sep 25

How Reproducible Are Evaluation Conclusions? A Self-Audit of LLM-Inferred Prompt Structure

The paper investigates the reliability of ranking tables produced by small-sample evaluations of large language models (LLMs). Using LLM‑inferred prompt structure across eight model variants, the authors find that prompt‑structure recovery is highly unstable, with only the bottom of the ranking consistently reproducible. They demonstrate that standard evaluation practices can misrepresent model performance and propose reporting practices to improve transparency.

By Dipankar Sarkar
arXiv AI
Oct 9

Large Language Model Turnover Undermines Screening for Artificial Intelligence-Assisted Scientific Writing

The study examines how the rapid turnover of large language models (LLMs) undermines the effectiveness of AI‑detectors used to screen scientific manuscripts. By comparing 4,000 PNAS abstracts rewritten by 23 different LLM versions released between June 2023 and August 2026, the authors show that detectors trained on past versions can fail dramatically at generation boundaries, missing up to 96% of rewrites just after a sharp transition. Even detectors updated to newer versions can overlook rewrites of older models, and a commercial detector missed most rewrites of the newest version while flagging few human‑written abstracts.

By Kazuki Nakajima, Takayuki Mizuno