arXiv (All)
open access
What Do We Expect from LLMs? Mapping the Design of LLM Benchmarks
Benchmarks are central to how progress in large language models (LLMs) is assessed and communicated. Yet model rankings alone reveal little about how evaluation requirements themselves are changing. The expanding variety of benchmarks offers another perspective: what researchers expect LLMs to do, a
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- English is Not All You Need: Systematically Exploring the Role of Multilinguality in LLM Post-Training#1048631
- Do Not Trust the Benchmark: Limitations of General LLM Rankings and a Case for Task-Specific Evaluation#1048945
- The Double Measurement Confound in Agent Benchmarks: De-Scaffolding, Ground-Truth Scoring, and Reliability Beyond the Mean#986988
- A Calibrated Reflection Approach for Enhancing Confidence Estimation in LLMs#927819
- Do large language models scrutinise what they review? A multimodal audit of scoring calibration, error detection, and author-identity effects#792877
Record · ID 1013783
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive