arXiv:2607. 01240v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Count-based F1 is widely used as a proxy for LLM error-detection quality, but this paper shows that it can rise dramatically without a corresponding improvement in span localization, a gap termed F1 Inflation.
By Dekun Yang
arXiv:2607. 19257v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Practitioners make three prompt-design decisions with almost no controlled evidence behind them: how to format instructions and context (markdown, plain text, prose, or tabular), how many simultaneous instructions a system prompt can carry before compliance degrades, and how much context a model can hold before recall and honesty degrade.
By Netanel Eliav
arXiv:2601. 22025v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Evaluating Large Language Model (LLM) applications differs from conventional software testing because outputs are probabilistic, semantically variable, and sensitive to prompt and model changes.
By Daniel Commey
Practitioners make three prompt-design decisions with almost no controlled evidence behind them: how to format instructions and context (markdown, plain text, prose, or tabular), how many simultaneous instructions a system prompt can carry before compliance degrades, and how much context a model can hold before recall and honesty degrade. We report two controlled experiments crossing all three factors on one held, contamination-free synthetic corpus (the "Book of Veyra," 8,780 uniquely-named entities, deterministically regenerable from a fixed seed), evaluated across five models.
arXiv:2607. 09665v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Prompt wrappers often differ only in formatting, yet they can change model scores enough to flip leaderboard conclusions.
By Deep Pankajbhai Mehta
arXiv:2608. 13591v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: High-confidence errors in large language models are often treated as evidence of fragile internal inference.
By Akira Okutomi