Benchmarks and evaluation

Leaderboards, eval harnesses and ablations — the contested business of deciding which model is actually better.

23,305 stories · RSS feed

arXiv AI
Jun 3

JudgmentBench: Comparing Rubric and Preference Evaluation for Quality Assessment

arXiv:2605. 25240v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Two methodologies dominate current practices of benchmarking: rubric-based scoring evaluates items against predefined criteria, whereas comparative judgment elicits pairwise preferences between outputs.

By Russell Yang, Ruishi Chen, Pierce Kelaita, Riya Ranjan, Sibo Ma, Charles Dickens, Matthew Guillod, Megan Ma, Julian Nyarko
arXiv AI
Jun 3

CoEval: Ranking Language Models for Custom Tasks Without Labeled Data or Trustworthy Benchmarks

arXiv:2606. 03650v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Choosing or ranking language models for a specific application is hardest when no task-specific labeled data exists, and standard public benchmarks cannot be trusted, their items having likely leaked into pretraining, so scores reflect memorization rather than fitness.

By Alexander Apartsin, Yehudit Aperstein
arXiv AI
Jun 3

Perceive Before Reasoning: A Pre-Reasoning Perception Framework for Efficient and Reliable Proactive Mobile Agents

arXiv:2606. 03236v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) have substantially advanced mobile agents, yet proactive mobile assistance remains challenging because agents must decide \emph{when} to intervene before determining \emph{how} to assist.

By Zhijie Ding (HyperAI Team, Xiaomi Corporation, Zhongnan University of Economics and Law), Weinan Hong (HyperAI Team, Xiaomi Corporation, Jilin University), Zicheng Zhu (HyperAI Team, Xiaomi Corporation, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shenzhen), Lei Li (HyperAI Team, Xiaomi Corporation), Dezhi Kong (HyperAI Team, Xiaomi Corporation), Hao Wang (HyperAI Team, Xiaomi Corporation), Peng Zhou (HyperAI Team, Xiaomi Corporation), Xuchu Jiang (HyperAI Team, Xiaomi Corporation), Jiaming Xu (HyperAI Team, Xiaomi Corporation)
arXiv AI
Jun 3

LEAP: Supercharging LLMs for Formal Mathematics with Agentic Frameworks

arXiv:2606. 03303v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) exhibit strong informal mathematical reasoning but struggle to generate mechanically verifiable proofs in formal languages like Lean.

By Po-Nien Kung, Linfeng Song, Dawsen Hwang, Jinsung Yoon, Chun-Liang Li, Simone Severini, Mirek Ol\v{s}\'ak, Edward Lockhart, Quoc V Le, Burak Gokturk, Thang Luong, Tomas Pfister, Nanyun Peng
arXiv Machine Learning
Jun 3

Skill-RM: Unifying Heterogeneous Evaluation Criteria via Agent Skill

arXiv:2606. 03980v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Reward models (RMs) provide critical feedback signals for LLM post-training, notably in reinforced fine-tuning (RFT) and reinforcement learning (RL) pipelines.

By Tao Chen, Gangwei Jiang, Pengyu Cheng, Siyuan Huang, Yihao Liu, Jingwei Ni, Jiaqi Guo, Mengyu Zhou, Kai Tang, Junling Liu, Qinliang Su, Xiaoxi Jiang, Guanjun Jiang
arXiv AI
Jun 3

Ref-DGS: Reflective Dual Gaussian Splatting

arXiv:2603. 07664v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: The reflective appearance, especially strong and typically near-field specular reflections, poses a fundamental challenge for accurate surface reconstruction and novel view synthesis.

By Ningjing Fan, Yiqun Wang, Dongming Yan, Peter Wonka
arXiv AI
Jun 3

KnapSpec: Self-Speculative Decoding via Adaptive Layer Selection as a Knapsack Problem

arXiv:2602. 20217v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Self-speculative decoding (SSD) accelerates LLM inference by skipping layers to create an efficient draft model, yet existing methods often rely on static heuristics that ignore the dynamic computational overhead of attention in long-context scenarios.

By Seongjin Cha, Gyuwan Kim, Dongsu Han, Tao Yang, Insu Han