arXiv AI By Jia-Hao Ji, Sijie Li, Jiabei Cheng, Zixi She, Jin-Tai Yu, Zhiyuan Yuan

Candidate supply and answer selection shape the value of LLM judging in multi-agent systems

Read the original on arXiv AI →

The Flow has not summarised this story yet — read it at arXiv AI.

arXiv AI
Aug 28

AgentJudgeBench: A Multi-Difficulty Benchmark for Evaluating LLM Judges on Agentic Tool-Calling

AgentJudgeBench is a new benchmark that evaluates the reliability of large language model (LLM) judges on agentic tool‑calling tasks involving workflow directed acyclic graphs (DAGs). It contains 3,808 instances across six DAG topologies and three difficulty tiers, tested with five generators (3B–70B open‑weight models and GPT‑5.4) and six judges (20B to frontier scale) under both paired‑with‑and‑without‑ground‑truth conditions. The study finds that judge alignment degrades with task difficulty, ground‑truth exposure can sometimes hurt alignment, and structured evaluation rubrics provide modest improvements, revealing a structural ceiling that model capacity alone cannot surpass.

By Abhigya Verma, Amit Kumar Saha, Seganrasan Subramanian, Sai Harshitha Aluru