arXiv AI By Xingyu Chen, Rui Wang, Zhaopeng Tu, Liefeng Bo

LivingArena: Do LLMs Know What Other LLMs Don't? Peer-Probing as Scalable Evaluation

Read the original on arXiv AI →

arXiv:2607. 24780v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Evaluating frontier LLMs is challenging: static benchmarks suffer from contamination and saturation -- leaving users unable to distinguish top models and developers blind to specific failure modes -- while human preference is subjective.

Summary generated by The Flow from the publisher's feed. The full article lives at arXiv AI.

Hugging Face Trending Papers
Jun 25

Ask, Don't Judge: Binary Questions for Interpretable LLM Evaluation and Self-Improvement

Evaluating LLM outputs remains a major bottleneck in NLP: human evaluation is expensive and slow, lexical metrics correlate poorly with human judgments on open-ended generation, and holistic LLM judges often produce opaque scores that are hard to debug. We propose BINEVAL, a framework that decomposes evaluation criteria into atomic binary questions and aggregates the resulting verdicts into interpretable, multi-dimensional scores.