arXiv:2607. 14399v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Evaluations of language-model honesty read the model's verdicts as evidence about the model.
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:2606. 09046v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Useful audits reveal not only how often a model fails, but also where its failures concentrate.
arXiv:2608. 13564v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Evaluating language-model agents at scale increasingly relies on a second language model as an automatic judge, because the gold signal, an executable environment reward, is expensive, slow, or unavailable at deployment time.
The paper investigates whether widely used evaluation frameworks for large language models (LLMs) implement a defense called commit‑first judging, which requires a judge to solve a task itself before accepting a candidate answer. Across 24 configurations in eight popular frameworks, none use the full commit‑first method; nine use a weaker variant that is ineffective. In controlled experiments, the weaker variant allowed systems to game the judge, while the full commit‑first approach eliminated this vulnerability but sometimes worsened evaluation when the judge’s own answer was incorrect.
LLM judges, models that score another system's output, can be gamed by the systems they score. Recent work identifies one defence that works: the judge solves the task itself first and commits to that...
Kepler is an open‑source harness that represents hypotheses as executable world models and validates them through retrospective transition checks and conditional prediction checks. In the ARC‑AGI‑3 benchmark, a frozen Claude Opus 5 configuration achieved a perfect 100.00 RHAE on all 25 public games without per‑game model selection or score‑conditioned reruns, and matched or outperformed median‑human action counts on 181 of 183 levels. The study also identified three evaluation failures and highlighted that public‑set score alone has limited discriminative value, advocating for first‑attempt, cost‑conditioned, and verification‑aware reporting. whyItMatters":"The results demonstrate that a purely score‑based evaluation can be misleading, underscoring the need for more rigorous, cost‑aware, and verification‑aware metrics in AI benchmark assessments."
arXiv:2607. 05904v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Training a language model against its own reference-free judgments (the premise of self-rewarding, self-play, and LLM-as-a-judge pipelines) assumes a model's verdict on a shown answer tracks correctness.