The paper introduces DECO, a diagnostic framework that factorises content into independent moderation criteria, allowing controlled evaluation of large language models (LLMs) at the criterion level. Using pairwise evaluation across four datasets and four LLMs, the authors find that high aggregate benchmark scores can mask significant failures when decisions hinge on specific content aspects required by individual criteria. The study underscores that aggregated labels do not guarantee reliable criterion-conditioned performance, highlighting the need for evaluation methods that explicitly assess this behavior.
By Danting Zhang, Bei Peng, Robert Loftin
arXiv:2609.10410v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: The growing complexity of content moderation policies presents a critical challenge for their consistent operationalization. While foundation models po...
By Ayan Majumdar, Shounak Paul, Pushpdeep Singh, Ines Abdelaziz, Sayeh Jarollahi, Seungeon Lee, Krishna P. Gummadi, Ingmar Weber, Abhisek Dash
arXiv:2607. 28282v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Evaluating the quality and relevance of textual outputs from Large Language Models (LLMs) remains challenging and resource-intensive.
By Bertil Braun, Martin Forell
arXiv:2608. 15600v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: The widespread circulation of abusive online content has increased the need for reliable moderation of Chinese social-media text.
By Mingyu Yuan, Shengtao Wen, Lingbing Guo, Zhen Bi, Xiang Chen
arXiv:2608.21775v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in real-world applications, yet they remain vulnerable to generating harmful content. From adver...
By Afshin Orojlooyjadid, Hitesh Patel
arXiv:2601. 21817v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Evaluating large language models (LLMs) on open-ended tasks without ground-truth labels is increasingly done via the LLM-as-a-judge paradigm.
By Mingyuan Xu, Xinzi Tan, Jiawei Wu, Doudou Zhou