arXiv (All)
open access
Learning Strategies to Break Judges
As AI agents surpass human performance, it becomes exceedingly hard for system designers to evaluate them directly and understand their failure modes. Consequently, agents themselves are being deployed extensively to evaluate, judge, and provide feedback on model traces. But this raises an important
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
- Measurement Without Validity: The Compounding Reliability Problem in Agentic AI Evaluation#999836
- Codifying the Judge: Scalable Evaluation via Program Distillation#1117526
- Operational Hallucination and Safety Drift in AI Agents#635915
- Operational Hallucination and Safety Drift in AI Agents#633566
- The Gold in Bias: Maturing the AI Design Process through Verification#1077657
Record · ID 1118846
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