AdaRubric: Task-Adaptive Rubrics for LLM Agent Evaluation
Liang Ding
Paper appears method- or tooling-adjacent to AI workflows with partial ecosystem coverage.
LLM-as-Judge evaluation fails agent tasks because a fixed rubric cannot capture what matters for this task: code debugging demands Correctness and Error Handling; web navigation demands Goal Alignment and Action Efficiency. We present ADARUBRIC, which closes this gap by generating task-specific evaluation rubrics on the fly from task descriptions, scoring trajectories step-by-step with confidence-weighted per-dimensi ...
on feedback, and filtering preference pairs with the novel DimensionAwareFilter - a provably necessary condition for preventing high-scoring dimensions from masking dimension-level failures. On WebArena and ToolBench, ADARUBRIC achieves Pearson r=0.79 human correlation (+0.16 over the best static baseline) with deployment-grade reliability (Krippendorff's $α$=0.83). DPO agents trained on ADARUBRIC preference pairs gain +6.8 to +8.5 pp task success over Prometheus across three benchmarks; gains transfer to SWE-bench code repair (+4.9 pp) and accelerate PPO convergence by +6.6 pp at 5K steps - both without any rubric engineering. Code: https://github.com/alphadl/AdaRubrics.
Results & Benchmarks
No concrete benchmark grounding is available yet. Treat the page as context or an implementation starting point only.
LLM-as-Judge evaluation fails agent tasks because a fixed rubric cannot capture what matters for this task: code debugging demands Correctness and Error Handling; web navigation demands Goal Alignment and Action Efficiency.
Implementation Evidence Summary
Recommendation evidence is currently too limited for a maintained-repo choice. Use Implementation Status and Reproduction Path for a practical baseline plan.
Reproduction Risks
- Estimate is based on paper-only reproduction flow
Hardware Notes
Expect multi-day setup/compute for meaningful reproduction based on current guidance.
Evidence disclosure
Evidence graph: 2 refs, 1 links.
Utility signals: depth 60/100, grounding 58/100, status medium.
Implementation Status
There is no verified maintained implementation yet. Use this baseline plan to decide whether to prototype now or defer.
- No direct maintained implementation was found. Use the paper PDF and citation graph to design a baseline reproduction.
- Track assumptions and missing details in an experiment log before coding.
Reproduction readiness
Hardware requirements
- Expect multi-day setup/compute for meaningful reproduction based on current guidance.
No verified implementation available
- · No maintained repository has been identified for this paper. Check adjacent implementations or HF artifacts below.
No benchmark numbers could be verified. You will not be able to validate reproduction correctness against published numbers.
Hugging Face artifacts
No trustworthy direct or curated related Hugging Face artifacts were found yet.
Continue with targeted Hugging Face searches derived from the paper title and method context:
Datasets
Spaces
Tip: start with models, then check datasets/spaces if you need evaluation data or demos.
Direct artifact matches are currently sparse. Use targeted Hugging Face searches to quickly locate candidate models, datasets, and demos.
Research context
Tasks
Agentic tool use
Methods
Reinforcement learning, Transformer
Domains
Large Language Models, AI Agents
Evaluation & Human Feedback Data
Open this paper in HFEPX to review benchmark signals, evaluation modes, and human-feedback protocol context.
Open in HFEPXExplore Similar Papers
Jump to Paper2Code search queries derived from this paper's research context.
Need human evaluators for your AI research? Scale annotation with expert AI Trainers.