arXiv:2606. 08679v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Pretrained models are often evaluated on multi-task leaderboards to measure their applicability in diverse contexts.
Summary generated by The Flow from the publisher's feed. The full article lives at arXiv Machine Learning.
arXiv:2607. 16259v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Pretrained models are typically ranked on multi-task leaderboards to assess their effectiveness across diverse tasks.
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.
arXiv:2608. 02455v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Human-centered assessment tasks, which are essential for systematic decision-making, rely heavily on human judgment and typically lack verifiable ground truth.
Human-centered assessment tasks, which are essential for systematic decision-making, rely heavily on human judgment and typically lack verifiable ground truth. Existing approaches face a dilemma: methods using only human judgments suffer from heterogeneous expertise and inconsistent rating scales, while methods using only model-generated scores must learn from imperfect proxies or incomplete features.
arXiv:2606. 27997v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Benchmarks of machine learning models often include many datasets, making evaluation expensive.
arXiv:2606. 04525v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Progress in genomic foundation models is difficult to assess due to fragmented benchmarks, incompatible evaluation protocols, and task-specific reporting.