arXiv AI By Kewen Zhu, Zixi Liu, Yanjing Li, Jing Chen

Context Over Compute Human-in-the-Loop Outperforms Iterative Chain-of-Thought Prompting in Interview Answer Quality

Read the original on arXiv AI →

arXiv:2603. 09995v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Behavioral interview evaluation using large language models presents unique challenges that require structured assessment, realistic interviewer behavior simulation, and pedagogical value for candidate training.

Machine-generated by The Flow from the publisher's headline and feed description — not written or checked by a human. The full article lives at arXiv AI.

arXiv AI
Aug 24

Evaluation-as-Search: Adaptive Discovery of Grounding Failures in Meeting Assistants

The paper introduces Evaluation-as-Search (EaS), a feedback‑driven method that adaptively probes LLM‑powered meeting assistants by focusing on natural questions likely to reveal grounding failures. Using EaS, the authors build MeetingProbe, a benchmark of over 3,000 annotated question‑answer pairs from 20 transcripts across three meeting genres and three assistants. Ablation studies show that adaptive search uncovers 2.5× more failures than random probing, revealing a capability gradient and eight recurring failure categories dominated by discourse‑pragmatic challenges.

By Sami Khairy, Yasaman Hosseinkashi, Vishak Gopal, Ross Cutler
arXiv AI
Aug 17

The Metacognitive Bottleneck: Japanese Riddles Reveal Fundamental Limits of Machine Insight and Self-Evaluation in Reasoning AI

arXiv:2509. 14704v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Benchmark saturation and training-data contamination increasingly obscure whether reported gains in large language models (LLMs) reflect genuine advances in reasoning or familiarity with recurring patterns in benchmark problems.

By Masaharu Mizumoto, Dat Nguyen, Zhiheng Han, Xingfu Li, Yo Nakawake, Le Minh Nguyen
arXiv Computation and Language
Aug 25

GRACE: Step-Level Benchmark for Faithful Reasoning over Context

GRACE is a step‑level benchmark for evaluating the faithfulness of chain‑of‑thought reasoning over context. It provides human annotations for each step in CoT traces from 10 models across 4 datasets, labeling faithfulness, error category, and natural‑language explanations. The benchmark introduces a data‑driven taxonomy that splits errors into GRACE‑Inference (deductive) and GRACE‑Grounding (factual) tracks, each with four categories, and demonstrates that incorporating step‑level faithfulness signals can improve downstream accuracy and reasoning reliability.

By Hoang Pham, Dong Le, Anh Tuan Luu