analiza aiqbench
This research introduces RuVerBench, a new benchmark addressing the critical reliability gap in using Large Language Models as judges for complex agentic workflows like deep research and coding. The study reveals that even frontier models struggle with noise in rubric verification, while strategies such as batching and majority voting offer specific trade-offs between accuracy and efficiency. By releasing this dataset, the authors provide essential tools for refining evaluation pipelines in autonomous AI systems.
Can LLM-as-a-Judge Reliably Verify Rubrics in Agentic Scenarios?
arXiv:2606.29920v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Rubric-based scoring has become a widely used paradigm in model evaluation, typically with LLM-as-a-Judge (LaaJ) for rubric scoring. However, the reliability of LaaJ for rubric scoring remains underexplored. This concern is especially pronounced in agentic scenarios, where long, complex outputs further challenge reliable scoring. To address this, we conduct a systematic meta-evaluation of LaaJ reliability for rubric verification. We introduce RuVerBench, the first benchmark for assessing LaaJ reliability in rubric verification for agentic scenarios. RuVerBench covers two prevalent agentic domains, deep research and agentic coding, with 2,458 instances, each containing a model-generated output, a rubric, and a human-annotated label indicating whether the output satisfies the rubric. Using RuVerBench, we evaluate numerous frontier LLMs and find that even the most advanced models achieve strong performance but still exhibit substantial noise. We further analyze the impact of key LaaJ strategies, including prompt design, batching, and majority voting, on rubric verification. We find that weaker models are more sensitive to prompt variations, batched verification presents a trade-off between accuracy and efficiency, and majority voting yields effective but diminishing returns. We have released our dataset and code to facilitate future research: https://github.com/THU-KEG/RuVerBench.
Title:Can LLM-as-a-Judge Reliably Verify Rubrics in Agentic Scenarios?
Abstract:Rubric-based scoring has become a widely used paradigm in model evaluation, typically with LLM-as-a-Judge (LaaJ) for rubric scoring. However, the reliability of LaaJ for rubric scoring remains underexplored. This concern is especially pronounced in agentic scenarios, where long, complex outputs further challenge reliable scoring. To address this, we conduct a systematic meta-evaluation of LaaJ reliability for rubric verification. We introduce RuVerBench, the first benchmark for assessing LaaJ reliability in rubric verification for agentic scenarios. RuVerBench covers two prevalent agentic domains, deep research and agentic coding, with 2,458 instances, each containing a model-generated output, a rubric, and a human-annotated label indicating whether the output satisfies the rubric. Using RuVerBench, we evaluate numerous frontier LLMs and find that even the most advanced models achieve strong performance but still exhibit substantial noise. We further analyze the impact of key LaaJ strategies, including prompt design, batching, and majority voting, on rubric verification. We find that weaker models are more sensitive to prompt variations, batched verification presents a trade-off between accuracy and efficiency, and majority voting yields effective but diminishing returns. We have released our dataset and code to facilitate future research: this https URL.
Computation and Language (cs.CL)
arXiv:2606.29920 [cs.CL]
(or arXiv:2606.29920v2 [cs.CL] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2606.29920 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Text integral sub licența deschisă a publicației · 291 cuvinte
Subiecte conexe

Projection sampling preserves capabilities but diminishes gains from alignment fine-tuning
LessWrong · 16 oct. 2026

Evaluate your Amazon Nova Sonic voice agent at scale, no microphone required
AWS · 8 iun. 2026

Building trust in AI agents: A production-ready evaluation framework with Amazon Bedrock AgentCore
AWS · 16 oct. 2026

What building Shippy taught us about building agents
Hugging Face · 15 iul. 2026