arXiv:2608. 02940v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: A reproducible compression statistic can still select the wrong candidate.
By Andrew Zhang
arXiv:2608.21382v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Multiple-choice benchmarks fix the questions and the correct answers, but not the harness: the order of the options, the wording of the prompt, and whe...
By V. S. Raghu Parupudi
arXiv:2609. 29140v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Repeated evaluation can estimate a benchmark score accurately while still requiring replication to certify narrow uncertainty.
By Yezhou Cheng, Runjia Du, Zeming Liu, Qibai Chen, Hang Lyu, Yilan Wei, Yankai Zeng, Bojun Lin
Repeated evaluation can estimate a benchmark score accurately while still requiring replication to certify narrow uncertainty. We characterize that requirement on a fixed grid of $M$ tasks with $L$ binary paths per task under the hard budget $(M+t)K$, where each path costs at most $K$ responses or episodes.
arXiv:2606. 23767v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Headline accuracies on the Tuebingen cause-effect pairs are routinely compared across papers even though each is measured under its authors' own protocol -- different pair subsets, weightings, model-selection, and decision rates.
By Wietse Stienstra
SimplexUQ introduces the first benchmark and reproducible protocol for evaluating how conformal prediction wrappers allocate coverage across simplex‑valued predictions. The framework, called SimplexTasks‑12, combines six synthetic regimes and six real tasks (e.g., class probabilities, topic mixtures, spectral abundances) to compare existing wrappers on metrics such as marginal coverage, worst‑stratum coverage, max disparity, and computational cost. Empirical results show that no single wrapper consistently dominates, with Mondrian and BatchMVP performing best in different settings, and that removing predictor bias only partially mitigates disparity.
By Liang You, Hengyu Shi, Dongwen Ou