Evaluation of large language models (LLMs) remains largely pre-scientific: it involves many design decisions, with little guidance on how to make them. These choices can substantially affect measured...
EvalDetectBench is an open pipeline and benchmark designed to measure evaluation awareness in frontier large language models, enabling practitioners to test models against any Inspect-compatible evaluation. It includes a curated transcript suite from current frontier system-card evaluations and diverse deployment sources, and it assesses both how reliably models recognize they are being evaluated and how detectable individual benchmarks are. The benchmark addresses systematic bias by calibrating probes per model and harmonizing generator selection to correct for variance caused by model identity and prompt choice.
arXiv:2509.20645v4 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Modern ML research increasingly faces an evaluation bottleneck: building benchmarks and running experiments is costly, slowing iteration. We...
arXiv:2606. 12117v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Benchmark scores often misrepresent a large language model's (LLM's) knowledge, because they rely, e.
arXiv:2608. 03803v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Multilingual language models are deployed across a hundred or more languages, yet most benchmarks test whether a model can perform a task _in_ a language rather than whether it commands the language itself, conflating fluency with proficiency.
arXiv:2606. 00920v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Run-level pass rate overstates retry-free coverage by up to 17.
arXiv:2509. 17314v4 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Software increasingly relies on the emergent capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs), from natural language understanding to program analysis and generation.
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.
LuxIT is a monolingual instruction‑tuning dataset for Luxembourgish, created by synthesizing instruction‑answer pairs from native texts using the DeepSeek‑R1‑0528 model and a quality‑assurance LLM‑as‑judge process. The resulting 227,507 high‑quality pairs were used to fine‑tune 14 LLMs (≤15 B parameters), yielding an average accuracy increase of +5.37 percentage points on standardized Luxembourgish proficiency exams and improvements in macro‑averaged F1 on nine of the fourteen downstream NLP tasks. These findings demonstrate that synthetic monolingual data can effectively enhance LLM performance in low‑resource languages and reveal the complex relationship between exam performance and practical NLP gains.
arXiv:2608.21766v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Both capability and safety benchmarks rest upon the assumption that the behavior of language models undergoing a test is informative about their beha...
arXiv:2609.07309v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Robustness evaluation of large language models (LLMs) remains a critical challenge, particularly in assessing their sensitivity to perturbations in i...
The paper demonstrates that large language model (LLM) evaluators, whether reward‑model based or prompted LLM‑as‑a‑Judge, exhibit significant language bias in multilingual settings. Experiments with semantically identical instruction‑response pairs across 23 languages reveal that lower‑resource languages receive higher scores, a bias that persists across eight open‑weight evaluators and is not detectable by standard pairwise accuracy metrics. The authors link the bias to model uncertainty and language identity, showing it cannot be explained by content difficulty alone.