Search: “llm evaluation”

What Breaks Under Pruning in Smart Homes, and When? Evaluating LLM Degradation Across Architectures and Task Complexity

Pruning study across four LLM architectures finds dense models degrade sharply on smart-home tool calling while MoE models tolerate far more.

Researchers systematically study pruning-induced degradation in smart-home tool calling across four LLMs spanning dense Transformer, dense hybrid, and mixture-of-experts architectures, combining depth, width, hybrid, and expert pruning methods, and evaluate over 19,500 instances from three datasets after post-pruning supervised fine-tuning. Dense models show narrow safe pruning regions followed by sharp degradation, while MoE models tolerate substantially more pruning. Pruning degrades grounded specificity (operation, device, argument, value) before schema-level intent, and aggressive dense pruning can induce systematic over-refusal.

arXiv cs.AI / cs.LG / cs.CL·Sep 15, 17:51 UTC · 1d agoAI research

Verifiable Social Reasoning for LLM Assistants

Fuse, a multi-agent simulation with hidden motives, evaluates LLM social reasoning, revealing compounding difficulty from user mediation and bias sensitivity.

Fuse is a multi-agent simulation framework in which a target agent with a hidden motive interacts with other agents including one representing the user, who consults the evaluated assistant to infer the motive, providing verifiable ground truth by construction. Simulation faithfulness is validated through a human study with 24k annotations. Applied to 12 LLMs, it shows user mediation compounds social reasoning difficulty, models are systematically sensitive to biased user framing, models may need more details than humans, and longer conversations do not always improve performance. The framework and a 21k-example dataset are open-sourced.

arXiv cs.AI / cs.LG / cs.CL·Sep 15, 17:37 UTC · 1d agoAI research

WearableQA: A Benchmark for Health Reasoning over Real-World Wearable Data

WearableQA benchmark tests LLM health reasoning over longitudinal wearable data; the best of 14 evaluated LLMs reaches 72.9% accuracy.

WearableQA comprises 4,084 ten-option multiple-choice questions built from wearable time series, blood biomarkers, and demographics of 200 real users with up to 500 days of daily measurements. It defines 16 question types along two axes: data versus health reasoning, and single- versus cross-signal reasoning. Evaluation of 14 proprietary and open-source LLMs shows performance from 19.6% to 72.9% against a 10% chance baseline, with most models below 60%.

arXiv cs.AI / cs.LG / cs.CL·Sep 4, 17:52 UTC · 12d agoAI research

Benchmark Radar: A Living Database and Search Engine for AI Benchmarks and Evaluation

Benchmark Radar provides a living searchable database of 1,283 AI benchmark records and 12,916 score observations drawn from 37 daily discovery sources.

Benchmark Radar combines daily discovery of benchmark papers, repositories, datasets, and releases from 13 direct connectors and 24 first-party feeds into a searchable catalog with model card mentions and score histories. The catalog contains 1,283 source records drawn from 4 benchmark catalogs plus 12,916 numeric observations on 790 records. The release includes a web dashboard with leaderboard, Pareto frontier of score versus usage, saturation and trend views, daily feeds, a CLI, and reproducible analysis. The paper audits the full catalog and examines benchmark saturation and limits of score comparisons.

Hugging Face daily papers·Sep 9, 20:00 UTC · 7d agoAI research

WearableQA: A Benchmark for Health Reasoning over Real-World Wearable Data

WearableQA benchmark introduces 4,084 questions over real longitudinal wearable data, showing 14 LLMs score 19.6-72.9% on health reasoning, far from solved.

WearableQA is a benchmark of 4,084 10-option multiple-choice questions built from wearable time series, blood biomarkers, and demographics of 200 real users with up to 500 days of daily measurements. It defines 16 question types along two axes: data versus health reasoning, and single- versus cross-signal reasoning, using a dual-grounding framework combining literature and population-validated patterns. Evaluations of 14 proprietary and open-source LLMs show accuracy ranging from 19.6% to 72.9% against a 10% chance baseline, with most models below 60%.

Hugging Face daily papers·Sep 3, 20:00 UTC · 13d agoAI research

Benchmark Scores Are Pipeline-Dependent: A Reliability Audit of Cybersecurity LLM Benchmarks

Audit of eight cybersecurity LLM benchmarks shows evaluation pipeline choices can swing scores by over 80 points and reshuffle most model rankings.

Researchers modeled eight cybersecurity benchmarks as configurable measurement pipelines and audited 10 proprietary, open-weight, and cybersecurity-specialized LLMs. They identified 15 systematic failure modes and showed a single pipeline choice can change a model's score by more than 80 percentage points and alter rankings; semantically similar task pairs rank the same models differently. Under a standardized harness, nine of 10 models shifted at least three ranks on at least one benchmark, motivating pipeline-aware auditing for reliable model evaluation.

arXiv cs.CR·Sep 8, 14:01 UTC · 8d agoAI research1

When LLM judges agree, should we believe them?

Amazon ICML paper uses Ising models to correct correlated LLM-judge votes, beating accuracy-weighted panels by 9-14%.

Amazon Science describes an ICML paper, "Dependence-aware label aggregation for LLM-as-a-judge via Ising models," addressing how correlated judge outputs inflate majority-vote confidence. The unsupervised method models pairwise dependence between judges, learning both reliability and similarity without human reference labels. Tested on relevance, toxicity, and summarization tasks with 10 judge models at temperature zero, it outperformed accuracy-weighted voting by 9% to 14%.

Hacker News · AI·Sep 14, 16:29 UTC · 2d agoAI researchHN 41↑ · 23 comments

Φ-Bench: Can Large Language Models Engineer the Infrastructure That Powers Them?

Researchers release Phi-Bench, a benchmark evaluating frontier LLMs on open-ended, long-horizon engineering and optimization of the LLM infrastructure stack.

Phi-Bench evaluates LLMs on open-ended engineering of the LLM infrastructure stack, derived from optimization problems studied in frontier research and grounded in real-world code repositories. Tasks range from localized kernel-level function completion to long-horizon implementation and end-to-end system optimization. Experiments on frontier LLMs reveal current capabilities and limitations on the path toward autonomous optimization of future AI infrastructure.

Hugging Face daily papers·Sep 8, 20:00 UTC · 8d agoAI research1

Beyond Outcomes: Dual-View Relational Learning for Efficient Agent Benchmarking

DualViewEval compresses agent benchmarks by jointly modeling outcome and process signals, achieving 24x-40x compression with only 20 tasks on APEX-Agents and BFCL.

DualViewEval is an agent benchmark compression method that jointly exploits outcome and process relations from trajectories to learn exact-size minisets predicting full-benchmark scores. The authors analyze large-scale trajectories and identify six process signals systematically associated with final agent performance. Across five agent benchmarks and five baselines, it achieves the best results on all datasets: with only 20 tasks it reaches 24x-40x compression on APEX-Agents and BFCL, reduces MAE by 14.5%-28.2% over the strongest competitors, and improves Kendall's tau by up to 7.2% relative to EssenceBench on SWE-bench Verified.

arXiv cs.AI / cs.LG / cs.CL·Sep 16, 16:49 UTC · 20h agoAI research1

ImpossibleRubrics: Stress-Testing Generated Rubrics as Reward Signals

ImpossibleRubrics benchmark shows LLM-generated rubric reward signals are exploited 8-26% of the time by adversarial answers on impossible tasks.

ImpossibleRubrics is a benchmark of 169 impossible tasks across six impossibility categories, each paired with a verifiable oracle certificate, plus 48 answerable controls, for stress-testing LLM-generated rubrics used as reward signals. Eleven rubric generators were exploited 8-26% of the time on an unbiased 150-task cut and up to 36% on a stress cut, while a certificate-faithful rubric scored 0%. A single generic 'be decisive, penalize hedging' rubric was exploited 64% of the time, suggesting tailored criteria can reveal which claims attackers should fabricate.

Hugging Face daily papers·Sep 14, 20:00 UTC · 2d agoAI research

Before You Poll with LLMs: A Deliberative Diagnostic Framework

Deliberative diagnostic shows all five tested frontier LLMs misrepresent human belief shifts after arguments, with GPT-5.1 reversing on outgroup questions.

The Deliberative Polling Diagnostic Framework compares human and LLM persona belief shifts after identical informational interventions, using data from America in One Room (526 personas, 72 questions). All five frontier models tested failed uniquely: GPT-5.1 exhibited partisan reversal (80% on outgroup vs 26% on policy questions), Gemini 2.0 Flash, Claude Sonnet 4.5 and Llama 3.3 70B overshot at 5-7x human magnitude, and DeepSeek V3 showed near-zero change (rigidity). The authors term the underlying signature 'self-sycophancy', conformity to the model's internal persona stereotype rather than reasoning from provided information.

arXiv cs.AI / cs.LG / cs.CL·Sep 14, 16:41 UTC · 2d agoAI research

Large Language Models for HVAC Operations in Building Energy Systems: A Critical Review of Methods, Applications, and Deployment Readiness

Systematic review of 66 studies finds LLMs for HVAC operations are mostly research-stage, with no ready-now deployment and only four pilot-level studies.

A critical review of 66 peer-reviewed studies from 2023 to March 2026 examines LLMs for HVAC operations in building energy systems. Only four studies reach pilot-level evidence, none reports sustained operational deployment, and 63 of 66 are research-only. Conventional ML, MPC, and RL remain dominant for high-frequency control and short-horizon forecasting, and the evidence supports LLMs primarily as semantic and workflow layers rather than autonomous controllers.

arXiv cs.AI / cs.LG / cs.CL·Sep 4, 16:08 UTC · 12d agoAI research

Unlocking Lossless Speedups in LLMs via Discrete Diffusion

Uno pairs autoregressive LLMs with lightweight diffusion weights to draw multiple tokens in parallel, delivering up to 3x lossless speedup without a draft model.

The paper introduces diffusion-augmented LLMs: autoregressive weights trained with the standard next-token objective plus lightweight diffusion weights trained via a Diffusion Distillation phase to emit multiple tokens in parallel. Psi-Spec samplers enable lossless acceleration without the separate draft model required by speculative decoding. The 8B Uno model outperforms the 26B open DiffusionGemma and proprietary Mercury 2 on agentic tool use, coding, and long-context reasoning benchmarks, with up to 3x throughput gains over the base model at all evaluated batch sizes. Code and checkpoints are released publicly.

Hugging Face daily papers·Sep 2, 20:00 UTC · 14d agoAI research

EvolveTrade: Experience-Driven Policy Refinement for Self-Evolving LLM Trading Agents

EvolveTrade lets LLM trading agents self-refine their tool-use policy from realized portfolio feedback, improving Sharpe ratios.

EvolveTrade treats a tool-using trading agent's system prompt as a text-parameterized policy that a Policy Agent revises after each update interval using accumulated decision traces and realized portfolio feedback, keeping the backbone LLM fixed. Experiments across multiple market regimes and two LLM backbones show improved Sharpe Ratio and Cumulative Return over fixed-policy baselines in most settings. Behavioral analyses show evolved policies increase code-mediated analysis and activate regime-relevant computations, with case-level attributions linking policy changes to returns.

Hugging Face daily papers·Sep 14, 20:00 UTC · 2d agoAI research

PlannerForge: LLM Agents for Scenario-Based Testing of Motion Planners in Autonomous Driving

PlannerForge unifies scenario-based testing of autonomous driving motion planners in one LLM-agent framework, outperforming prior baselines.

PlannerForge is an LLM-agent framework that covers the full scenario-based testing pipeline for autonomous driving systems, spanning scenario generation, selection, modification, routing, planner testing, plus new enhancement and benchmarking stages. In evaluations with 10 off-the-shelf LLMs, best-per-task scores range from 0.88 to 1.00, and open-source 20-35B backends such as Qwen3.6:35B match commercial APIs on most tasks. End-to-end chaining retains 83% (commercial) and 78% (open) of seed queries, beats Scenario Factory 2.0 on executable generation, and cost-tuning lifts planner success from 50.4% to 70.2% while cutting collisions from 19.0% to 8.4%.

Hugging Face daily papers·Sep 7, 20:00 UTC · 9d agoAI research

What Does an LLM-Agent Leaderboard Rank Actually Compare?

A methodological study shows close LLM-agent leaderboard rank gaps on SWE-bench and similar benchmarks often do not support superiority claims.

The paper defines an estimand-aware pairwise procedure for comparing agents, checking common support and applying explicit uncertainty rules and practical margins. Across SWE-bench, AgentRewardBench, and tau2-bench, close rank differences are frequently unresolved, and proxy labels or utility rules can change which system is selected. The authors argue a leaderboard score summarizes a released evaluation but does not by itself justify pairwise superiority conclusions.

arXiv cs.AI / cs.LG / cs.CL·Sep 7, 17:31 UTC · 9d agoAI research

Academics Develop Testing Benchmark for LLMs in CTI

Infosecurity Magazine·Jun 17, 14:30 UTC · Jun 17, 2024AI research1

Google Research Releases ToolGrad: Answer-First Framework Hits 99.8% Pass Rate for Tool-Use Data Generation

Google Research and partners introduce ToolGrad, a verified tool-chain-first data generation framework reaching 99.8% pass rate and boosting Gemma-3-12B to 83.1 on BFCL.

Researchers from Google, the University of Tokyo, RIKEN AIP, and Tohoku University released ToolGrad, which inverts query-first tool-use data generation by executing and verifying API chains before annotating them with user queries. On the ToolBench database of 16,000+ APIs, ToolGrad raised generation pass rate from 63.8% to 99.8% while increasing tool uses per sample from 2.1 to 3.4 and cutting tool-use steps from 34.3 to 20.0. Fine-tuning Gemma-3 at 1B, 4B, and 12B parameters on the 500-sample ToolGrad-500 dataset lifted ToolGrad-12B to 83.1 on the Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard, near Gemini 2.5 Pro at 83.2 and ahead of GPT-5 at 74.4. Code is Apache-2.0, with the dataset, PyPI package, and models available on Hugging Face.

MarkTechPost·Sep 11, 06:01 UTC · 6d agoAI research1

Guiding Worker Self-Selection in Crowdsourcing Contests: An LLM-Augmented Algorithmic Approach

Researchers introduce GRAF, a greedy framework for crowdsourcing contest self-selection, and LLMScore, an LLM-driven method that auto-designs its scoring algorithm.

The paper studies self-selection in Tullock contests (SSTC), where workers choose contests and then compete within them. GRAF is a greedy polynomial-time framework that orders workers by a score vector with zero worker regret and platform optimality guarantees in special cases. LLMScore is an LLM-driven evolutionary framework that produces human-readable, inspectable scoring code, jointly optimizing platform utility and worker satisfaction. Across 1,000 synthetic instances in four settings, GRAF with LLMScore achieves high-quality, often near-optimal outcomes with low worker regret, transferring from small training instances to larger, structurally different settings.

arXiv cs.AI / cs.LG / cs.CL·Sep 7, 16:51 UTC · 9d agoAI research1

COBRA-Skills: Contextual Bandit-Guided Evolution for Agent Skill Optimization

COBRA-Skills uses contextual bandits to guide LLM agent skill evolution, cutting optimization cost 55-58% versus SkillOpt while topping six agent benchmarks.

COBRA-Skills formulates LLM agent skill optimization as budgeted sequential optimization over a dynamically evolving candidate space. It couples contextual-bandit-guided prioritization with evidence-grounded skill evolution, selectively spending execution-based evaluations on promising candidates while refining skills from feedback. Across six heterogeneous agent benchmarks and three target models, it achieves the strongest average performance while reducing optimization cost by 55-58% relative to SkillOpt using only 50 unique optimization examples per benchmark. The method remains robust to agent harness changes and works when the target model generates its own skills.

Hugging Face daily papers·Sep 9, 20:00 UTC · 7d agoAI research

LLM Agents as Computational Typologists

AUTOTYPOLOGIST is an LLM agent that performs evidence-grounded linguistic typology analysis over 25 open-source reference grammars.

The agent retrieves relevant grammar sections, analyzes interlinear glossed text (IGT), and iteratively reasons over typological hypotheses in a ReAct-style workflow. It was evaluated on typological feature coding against expert annotations and hypothesis testing against universals using 25 open-source reference grammars. Results suggest LLM agents can support scalable, inspectable crosslinguistic analysis but still require expert validation.

arXiv cs.AI / cs.LG / cs.CL·Sep 7, 17:35 UTC · 9d agoAI research1

How well do agents use test/verification techniques?

Dan Luu's eval finds coding-agent testing instructions (TDD, formal methods, PBT, skills) mostly fail to beat defaults on Zstd implementation correctness.

The author ran 26 prompt conditions plus 4 skills on a Zstd-in-Rust implementation eval using codex with GPT-5.6, testing TDD, fuzzing, property-based testing, formal methods (Lean 4, TLA+, Verus, Kani, SMT solvers) and community skills. Nothing dramatically outperformed the default no-instruction condition, which did above average; at xhigh effort, fuzzing and PBT conditions did slightly better than formal methods. Pre-registered predictions included TDD underperforming and popular test skills (ECC, Hegel, Trail of Bits) not outperforming. Results are averages of 80 runs per condition plotted against cost.

Hacker News · security·Sep 8, 02:58 UTC · 9d agoAI researchHN 131↑ · 50 comments

HypoEvolve: Genetic Algorithms Enable Multi-Agent LLMs to Discover Scientific Hypotheses

HypoEvolve uses a generational genetic algorithm coordinating specialized LLM agents to generate scientific hypotheses, outperforming six baselines on cancer drug repurposing.

HypoEvolve is a framework that coordinates specialized LLM agents through a generational genetic algorithm to produce, revise, and retain scientific hypotheses with explicit collaboration roles. It evaluates drug repurposing hypotheses against external evidence from DepMap and Open Targets across 34 cancer types. It achieves the highest scores against six baselines, reaching DepMap selectivity of 0.171 versus 0.115 for the strongest baseline, and gains over single-pass generation generalize to held-out cancer types.

Hugging Face daily papers·updated Sep 14, 17:44 UTC · 2d ago·first Sep 13, 20:00 UTC · 3d agoAI research 2 sources

Studying Without a Syllabus: Task-Agnostic Environment Preprocessing

Paper formalizes task-agnostic environment preprocessing, where agents study unfamiliar environments under a budget to build reusable artifacts for a frozen solver.

The paper formalizes task-agnostic environment preprocessing, where a studying system explores an environment under a budget and produces artifacts like indices, scripts, or procedural guidance for a frozen solver, without task examples or evaluation feedback. The authors compare unaided and archive-equipped meta-agents against fixed synthetic-practice and corpus-processing methods across six heterogeneous benchmarks. A meta-agent variant achieves the highest Avg@3 reward on five benchmarks, while fixed corpus processing remains best on the largest corpus benchmark. Studied artifacts reduce the test-time sampling needed to reach a given score, shifting computation from repeated test-time attempts to a pre-task study phase.

Hugging Face daily papers·Sep 8, 20:00 UTC · 8d agoAI research

Ask Before You Optimize: Dynamic Pre-Formulation Clarification for Interactive Optimization

Researchers release OR-Clarify, a benchmark testing whether LLM agents ask clarifying questions before formulating optimization models from incomplete requests.

OR-Clarify evaluates pre-formulation clarification in operations research: each task gives a partial problem description, withholds structured hidden slots, and scores agents via bounded interaction with a simulated user, measuring slot recovery, stopping behavior, silent assumptions, and interaction cost. The authors also propose InterOPT, a two-stage framework that identifies formulation-critical gaps to decide when to ask or stop. In choice-based experiments InterOPT substantially outperforms all baselines in exact slot recovery and remains competitive in the open-ended setting.

Hugging Face daily papers·Sep 3, 20:00 UTC · 13d agoAI research1

EVOHARNESSBENCH: Can Your Agents Keep Pace with an Evolving Harness?

Researchers introduce EVOHARNESSBENCH, a benchmark showing that evolving agent harnesses (tools, skills, agents) cause forgetting and inconsistent adaptation across 802 tasks.

The paper introduces EVOHARNESSBENCH, a benchmark that places non-stationarity in the externally supplied agent harness rather than in the task stream, evaluating agents across tools, skills, and specialist agents. It comprises 17 multi-stage harness streams built deterministically from verifier-based benchmarks, totaling 802 tasks, 520 tools, 42 skills, and 62 agents. Evaluation covers deployment (retention of previously accessible competence) and self-evolving adaptation settings. Results show harness expansion alone degrades previously solved tasks (harness-induced forgetting), adaptation gains are inconsistent, and retention and adaptation can pull in opposite directions.

Hugging Face daily papers·Sep 2, 20:00 UTC · 14d agoAI research

Import AI 469: Science AI; RSI simulator; and Zuck's technological pessimism

New DiG-bench benchmark of 70 hidden-rule games shows only Opus 5 and Fable 5 solving the hardest tiers, probing AI discovery and creativity.

Import AI 469 highlights DiG-bench (Discovery in Games), a benchmark of 70 handcrafted games with hidden rules and objectives where only 21 games are public and most are kept private to avoid training contamination. Only Opus 5 and Fable 5 with Claude Code solved any Tier 7 tasks (about 0.2 success), with GPT-5.5 next; the games are text-based and have beaten every human tester at least once. The newsletter also covers an RSI simulator game by Paradigm Research and Inherent's Faraday, a post-trained open-weight model that supervises frontier models to improve scientific research output.

Import AI·Aug 17, 13:05 UTC · Aug 17, 2026AI research

Signed Rescue Routing: Harm-Aware Cascades for Efficient LLM Inference

Signed Rescue Routing improves LLM cascade efficiency by predicting when a larger model actually corrects a smaller one rather than uncertainty.

Signed Rescue Routing (SRR) is a budgeted cascade method that separately predicts rescues and regressions when escalating from a small to a large model, ranking requests by their signed difference. The authors prove this signed conditional gain is Bayes-optimal under a fixed escalation budget and add only a lightweight two-head router needing small-model output statistics at deployment. Evaluation with Qwen3-4B and Qwen3-8B on MMLU, HellaSwag, and ARC-Challenge shows better accuracy-compute tradeoffs than entropy routing and learned error predictors.

arXiv cs.AI / cs.LG / cs.CL·Sep 7, 17:31 UTC · 9d agoAI research1

Biology-in-the-loop: Amortized Adaptive Hit Discovery in CRISPR Screens

Researchers release AssayBench-Loop, a 1,389-screen CRISPR benchmark, and AssayLoop, a framework that learns adaptive hit discovery policies.

The paper introduces AssayBench-Loop, a large-scale benchmark of 1,389 CRISPR screens across five phenotype categories for adaptive hit discovery under budget constraints. It also introduces AssayLoop, which combines AssayFormer, a transformer-based amortized acquisition policy trained across historical screens, with LLM-derived biological priors via an adaptive handoff. On temporally held-out screens, AssayLoop achieves 5.67-fold enrichment over random selection and recovers 27.7% of hits after assaying roughly 5% of the candidate library, outperforming existing adaptive-design methods and standalone LLMs.

arXiv cs.AI / cs.LG / cs.CL·Sep 10, 17:45 UTC · 6d agoAI research1

When Should LLMs Abstain? Chain-of-Self-Questioning for Selective Risk Control

Chain-of-Self-Questioning prompting cuts LLM wrong-answer commitments 32% relative while raising answered accuracy, holding across eleven model families.

The paper introduces Chain-of-Self-Questioning (CoSQ), a prompt-only framework that makes LLM answer commitment conditional on an explicit assessment of the information required to answer. On an 817-item TruthfulQA multiple-choice set, Grounded-CoSQ at τ=0.90 reduced mean unconditional wrong-commitment rate from 13.1% under chain-of-thought to 8.9% (a 32.1% relative reduction), while raising answered accuracy from 86.9% to 89.7% at 87.6% coverage. Improvements held across eleven open-weight and hosted model families and at every evaluated threshold, with convergent evidence from a Natural Questions short-answer evaluation.

arXiv cs.AI / cs.LG / cs.CL·Sep 15, 17:52 UTC · 1d agoAI research

Kentik AI Advisor brings intelligence and automation to network design and operations

Help Net Security·Nov 18, 00:00 UTC · Nov 18, 2025AI research

Diffs vs. Whole Files: An Empirical Comparison of Iterative Edit-Based and Direct Generation for Flutter/Dart Code Models

Empirical study finds direct whole-file generation beats iterative diff-based editing for Flutter/Dart code models on about 1,790 held-out tasks.

Researchers trained Rainbow-Pony-100M from scratch and fine-tuned Qwen2.5-Coder-0.5B in both direct-generation and diff-based regimes, then evaluated four resulting models on roughly 1,790 Flutter/Dart tasks. Direct generation outperformed diff-based generation on compilation pass rate, bits-per-byte, character-level similarity, and blinded LLM-judge ratings. Diff-based editing is competitive only on short, localized edits in refactoring and error-handling tasks, a property the authors call task locality.

Hugging Face daily papers·Sep 4, 20:00 UTC · 12d agoAI research1

Domain-Specific Hallucination Detection in Large Language Models

A multi-signal pipeline detects LLM hallucinations, reaching F1 0.915 on HaluEval and cutting Qwen2.5-0.5B hallucination rates from 85.5% to 37.7% via DPO.

The paper presents a hallucination detection pipeline combining fine-tuned DeBERTa-v3 classification, Monte Carlo Dropout uncertainty, and temperature-scaled calibration. It achieves F1 0.915 and AUROC 0.977 on general-domain HaluEval tasks, with MC Dropout inference raising accuracy to 93.2%. Applying DPO to a Qwen2.5-0.5B generator reduces its hallucination rate from 85.5% to 37.7%, while cross-domain evaluation shows poor general-domain transfer to SciFact (F1 0.52) and PubMedBERT fine-tuning as the strongest adaptation (F1 0.63).

arXiv cs.AI / cs.LG / cs.CL·Sep 10, 17:45 UTC · 6d agoAI research1

What Else Needs Fixing? Exploring Cost-Effective Test-Time Compute for Revision Propagation in Artifacts Generated Through Conversation

A new benchmark shows LLMs reach 68.3-93% accuracy propagating local revisions across conversationally generated artifacts, with parallel-sample selection most cost-effective.

The paper introduces a benchmark for revision propagation: when users request a local change, LLMs must identify dependencies and update all affected parts of an artifact generated through conversation, where context lives in the chat history. Nine revision methods, including sequential reflection and parallel sampling variants, were evaluated on gpt-oss-20b/120b, gpt-5.4-mini, and qwen3.5-9b/27b/122b. Baselines scored 68.3-93% accuracy, and selecting among three parallel samples via LLM-based or medoid selection improved accuracy by 2.2-9.7% as the most cost-effective test-time compute strategy. Code and dataset are released.

Hugging Face daily papers·Sep 2, 20:00 UTC · 14d agoAI research

Root-Cause Attribution Is a Search Problem: Continual Search for Long-Horizon Agent Failures

Continual Search framework iteratively prompts LLM judges to keep searching agent execution logs, boosting long-horizon failure root-cause attribution accuracy.

The paper frames automated root-cause attribution (RCA) for long-horizon AI agent failures as a search problem, since relevant evidence is sparse and distributed across massive execution traces. The authors propose Continual Search, an iterative framework that nudges an LLM judge across successive turns to keep hunting unresolved diagnostic evidence instead of settling on an early plausible diagnosis. They introduce MegaRCA-Mix, a benchmark of 50 human-annotated failure trials on long-horizon, execution-heavy tasks. On MegaRCA-Mix, Continual Search improves GPT-5.5's F1 from 0.349 to 0.498 (over 40% gain), and lower-tier models can surpass higher-tier counterparts when search is effective.

Hugging Face daily papers·Sep 10, 20:00 UTC · 6d agoAI research1

Context Engineering Inside the Harness: 4 Mechanisms That Beat Context Overflow and Goal Loss on Long-Horizon Tasks

Survey of four harness mechanisms—context budgeting, compaction, todo-state, and memory—that keep long-horizon LLM agents on task across 200+ tool calls.

The article details how agent harnesses, not larger context windows, solve context overflow and goal loss on long-horizon tasks, citing Chroma's Context Rot report showing 18 LLMs (GPT-4.1, Claude 4, Gemini 2.5, Qwen3) degrade on long inputs. Concrete implementations include LangChain Deep Agents offloading tool responses over 20,000 tokens to the filesystem and truncating old tool calls at 85% window usage, and Claude Code capping auto memory at 25KB while re-reading the 5 most recently modified files after compaction. OpenAI's Responses API now offers server-side compaction via context_management with a standalone /responses/compact endpoint, which Codex uses for long-running coding tasks. Manus reports a roughly 100:1 input-to-output token ratio per ~50-tool-call task, motivating todo.md state recitation to prevent goal drift.

MarkTechPost·Sep 13, 05:56 UTC · 4d agoAI research2

Motion-Omni: End-to-End Joint Speech and Full-Body Motion for Spoken Dialogue

Researchers introduce Motion-Omni, an end-to-end model generating speech with synchronized full-body motion, responding 5.4x faster than cascade pipelines.

Motion-Omni is an end-to-end framework in which a spoken dialogue model outputs facial expressions and hand, upper-body, and lower-body motion directly from the hidden states that produce speech, replacing two-stage cascade pipelines. Trained on 422,856 quality-ranked pseudo-labeled pairs (1,402 hours) with a Qwen2.5-7B-Instruct backbone, Motion-Omni-Q7 matches its teacher cascade within 2% on reference-free motion metrics, achieves a 2.62% word error rate, and runs faster than real time (RTF=0.78). The authors also release the SwDA-500 dataset and the first public evaluation protocol for stochastic open-ended full-body spoken dialogue.

Hugging Face daily papers·Aug 27, 20:00 UTC · 20d agoAI research2

Google's TurboQuant cuts AI memory use without losing accuracy

Help Net Security·Mar 25, 00:00 UTC · Mar 25, 2026AI research

Why Is Video Still So Expensive? A Survey of Inference-Efficiency Mechanisms in Video and Audiovisual LLMs

A survey catalogs inference-efficiency techniques for video and audiovisual LLMs, mapping bottlenecks in sampling, encoding, token reduction, and LLM decoding.

This survey covers inference-efficiency mechanisms for visual and audiovisual video LLMs, reporting reductions in parameters, FLOPs, latency, memory, and token counts. It organizes methods by pipeline stage, covering frame sampling, modality encoding, connector-level token reduction, and LLM prefilling and decoding for systems built since late 2022. The authors compile accuracy-cost comparisons under shared host models and input protocols, identify gaps in audiovisual efficiency and standardized evaluation, and maintain a public repository.

Hugging Face daily papers·Sep 8, 20:00 UTC · 8d agoAI research

Can LLMs Engineer Their Own Agent Harness? ByteDance Seed’s HarnessDev Says Only 34 of 64 Changes Generalize

ByteDance Seed's HarnessDev benchmark finds LLM-built agent harnesses trail human engineering on code and search, with only 34 of 64 revisions generalizing.

Researchers from ByteDance Seed, SUTD, Georgia Tech, M-A-P, and TokenWave.AI introduce HarnessDev, a benchmark that evaluates the runnable agent harness an LLM writes rather than its answers, using Creation and Evolution stages across SWE-bench Pro, Terminal-Bench 2.1, MLE-bench, EQ-Bench3, and BrowseComp (2,207 instances). Six creator models including Opus 4.8, GPT-5.5, Gemini 3.1 Pro, DeepSeek V4 Pro, Qwen 3.7 Max, and Seed 2.0 Pro were tested; Opus 4.8 posted the best average of 67.8 versus an 86.2 human-engineered reference. Self-built harnesses beat references on writing and ML experimentation but lag badly on code and search, and quality proved executor-specific: Opus 4.8 fell from 69.3 to 33.0 on SWE-bench Pro when the executor was switched to Gemini. Evolution gains were small and noisy: of 64 adjacent changes, feedback and held-out scores agreed only 34 times (53.1%), and much generated state and memory code never executed.

MarkTechPost·updated Sep 16, 17:41 UTC · 19h ago·first Sep 11, 22:01 UTC · 5d agoAI research 20 sources