arXiv (All)
open access
Benchmarks Are Not Atomic: Composition-Aware LLM Evaluation using BenchHub
LLM benchmarks are often treated as coherent measurement units, yet they are heterogeneous collections of instances spanning diverse domains, skills, formats, and contexts. As a result, aggregate benchmark scores can conflate model capability with benchmark composition, obscuring what existing bench
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
- Adaptive Testing for LLM Evaluation: A Psychometric Alternative to Static Benchmarks#1355545
- The Double Measurement Confound in Agent Benchmarks: De-Scaffolding, Ground-Truth Scoring, and Reliability Beyond the Mean#986988
- GeoFitBench-LLM: A Benchmark for Assessing Large Language Models' Capabilities in Geospatial Data Requirements Elicitation for Geo-Analytic Tasks#1296676
- What Current AI Benchmarks Leave Unmeasured: Modality, Search, Citations, and Implications (for Safety Evaluations)#1297221
- Balance of Benchmarks: Semantic Density Reweighting for Benchmark Multiplicity and Task-Conditioned Evaluation#972476
Record · ID 1328293
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