Benchmarks and evaluation

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

28,322 stories · RSS feed

arXiv Computation and Language
Sep 16

Toward Robust LLM-Based Judges: Taxonomic Bias Evaluation and Debiasing Optimization

The paper introduces JudgeBiasBench, a benchmark that systematically quantifies judgment biases in large language model (LLM)-based judges across four dimensions and 12 bias types. It evaluates both generative and discriminative judges, revealing significant bias patterns that undermine reliability. The authors propose bias-aware training—reinforcement learning for generative judges and contrastive learning for discriminative judges—to reduce these biases while maintaining evaluation performance.

By Hongli Zhou, Hui Huang, Rui Zhang, Kehai Chen, Bing Xu, Conghui Zhu, Tiejun Zhao, Muyun Yang
arXiv Computation and Language
Sep 16

Audio-Visual Turn-taking Prediction in Cocktail Party Scenarios

The paper evaluates audio‑visual predictive turn‑taking models trained on clean data when applied to a noisy cocktail‑party scenario derived from the AVCocktail dataset. Results show a consistent performance drop—up to 38% relative in weighted F1—across both audio and visual modalities, with fine‑tuning improving robustness but varying by modality and pre‑training data size. The study highlights differing generalisation and adaptation abilities of audio versus visual inputs and underscores the need for robust modelling strategies in noisy human interactions.

By Long-Vu Hoang, Naomi Harte