arXiv:2606. 24834v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: LLM-based dialogue assistants have become mainstream tools for software developers, yet current evaluation benchmarks focus exclusively on functional correctness.
Summary generated by The Flow from the publisher's feed. The full article lives at arXiv AI.
arXiv:2607. 12085v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Evaluating retail conversational agents requires methods beyond lexical-overlap metrics to assess intent alignment, factuality, helpfulness, clarity, tone, and overall response quality.
arXiv:2606. 30491v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Background.
arXiv:2607. 03968v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models are increasingly deployed as IDE-integrated coding agents that decompose tasks, generate and edit files, run code, and refine outputs over many turns.
arXiv:2606. 29225v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: LLM agents handle user requests on behalf of organizations through tool calls and must follow the company policies stated in their system prompts.
arXiv:2606. 17474v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly considered for use in clinical consultation tasks, yet most medical evaluations remain static, single-turn, or narrowly outcome-based, limiting their ability to reflect the sequential, uncertain, and interactive nature of real-world care.
arXiv:2509. 02594v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Evaluating large language models (LLMs) on their ability to generate high-quality, accurate, situationally aware answers to clinical questions requires going beyond conventional benchmarks to assess how these systems behave in complex, high-stakes clinical scenarios.