arXiv:2609.21841v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Frontier language models now produce professional deliverables that expert graders judge to match human work on a substantial share of economically val...
By Abbas Raza Ali, Muhammad Ajmal Siddiqui, Moona Zahid
The paper introduces a lifecycle framework for LLM-as-a-Judge systems used to evaluate recommendation explanations at Netflix. It outlines four phases—Birth, Training, Deployment, and Monitoring—detailing how each stage addresses specific technical and operational challenges. The authors report that after five weeks of A/B testing, judge-aligned explanations increased novel content viewing and successful browse-to-play sessions without quality takedowns.
By Emma Yanyang Kong, JJ Tan, Ishan Gupta, Lars Olds, Claire Campbell, David Fagnan, Veli Balin, Rohan Gosain, Louis Garcia, Minsu Jang
The paper introduces Thomson, a frontier AI model developed through continual learning on open-weight models, aiming to democratize access to high-performance AI. It argues that institutions with limited resources can achieve frontier-level performance by applying a modern mid- & post-training stack, preserving model plasticity and stability while minimizing high-impact interventions. Thomson demonstrates competitive performance across agentic tasks, safety, legal, tax, multilingualism, and large-scale deep research, exhibiting a distinctive π-shaped improvement pattern and effectively mitigating the forgetting problem seen in narrow domain adaptation.
By Shengzhuang Chen, Jerrod Parker, Yejin Bang, Andrew M. Bean, Nabeel Seedat, Stefan Winzeck, Daniil Glazko, Jannik Zgraggen, Fangyi Yu, Scott Arnott, Dietrich Trautmann, Luca Ciuffreda, Guglielmo Bonifazi, Davide Romano, Bradley Bell, Kirsty Fielding, Daniele Giofr\`e, Tom Zielund, Ipshita Chatterjee, Sneha Murthy Ghantasala, Manpreet Nanreh, John Scoville, Maciej Sakowicz, Wassim Seifeddine, Lukas Thede, Jonathan Richard Schwarz
arXiv:2607. 25891v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Evaluating AI agents in interactive environments is hindered by fragmented tasks, scaffolds, verifiers, and scoring rules.
By Stefan Krsteski, Charlotte Meyer, Guillaume Allegre, Tony O'Halloran, Alexandre Sallinen
arXiv:2606.16206v2 Announce Type: replace
Abstract: Large language models are increasingly proposed as educational tutors, yet stronger task-solving ability does not necessarily imply stronger learni...
By Junyi Yao, Zihao Zheng, Baichuan Li
The study investigates how prior scores influence large language model (LLM) judgments in the LLM-as-a-Judge paradigm. By testing three prompt conditions—no metadata, revision framing, and anchored metadata containing prior scores—the authors find that prior scores systematically bias evaluations, shifting ratings toward those scores across 192,000 attempts. The bias also affects categorical decisions, blocking 48% of error corrections and flipping 10.18% of correct judgments, and is not mitigated by Chain-of-Thought or a warning, underscoring the need for careful context engineering.
By Ante Kapetanovic, Kemal Altwlkany, Andro Mercep, Tomislav Duricic, Emanuel Lacic