Skip to content
← Back to explorer

Daily Archive

HFEPX Weekly Archive: 2025-W43

Updated from current HFEPX corpus (Feb 27, 2026). 14 papers are grouped in this daily page. Common evaluation modes: Automatic Metrics, Simulation Env. Most common rater population: Domain Experts. Common annotation unit: Freeform. Frequent quality control: Calibration. Frequently cited benchmark: Caparena. Common metric signal: accuracy. Use this page to compare protocol setup, judge behavior, and labeling design decisions before running new eval experiments. Newest paper in this set is from Oct 26, 2025.

Papers: 14 Last published: Oct 26, 2025 Global RSS

Research Narrative

Grounded narrative Model: deterministic-grounded Source: persisted

Updated from current HFEPX corpus (Feb 27, 2026). This page tracks 14 papers for HFEPX Weekly Archive: 2025-W43. Dominant protocol signals include automatic metrics, simulation environments, human evaluation, with frequent benchmark focus on Caparena, Honestybench and metric focus on accuracy, calibration error. Use the grounded sections below to prioritize reproducible protocol choices, benchmark-matched comparisons, and judge-vs-human evaluation checks.

Why This Matters For Eval Research

Protocol Takeaways

Benchmark Interpretation

  • Caparena appears in 7.1% of hub papers (1/14); use this cohort for benchmark-matched comparisons.
  • Honestybench appears in 7.1% of hub papers (1/14); use this cohort for benchmark-matched comparisons.

Metric Interpretation

  • accuracy is reported in 14.3% of hub papers (2/14); compare with a secondary metric before ranking methods.
  • calibration error is reported in 7.1% of hub papers (1/14); compare with a secondary metric before ranking methods.

Researcher Checklist

  • Tighten coverage on Papers with explicit human feedback. Coverage is usable but incomplete (35.7% vs 45% target).
  • Close gap on Papers reporting quality controls. Coverage is a replication risk (14.3% vs 30% target).
  • Tighten coverage on Papers naming benchmarks/datasets. Coverage is usable but incomplete (21.4% vs 35% target).
  • Maintain strength on Papers naming evaluation metrics. Coverage is strong (35.7% vs 35% target).
  • Tighten coverage on Papers with known rater population. Coverage is usable but incomplete (21.4% vs 35% target).
  • Close gap on Papers with known annotation unit. Coverage is a replication risk (14.3% vs 35% target).

Papers with explicit human feedback

Coverage is usable but incomplete (35.7% vs 45% target).

Papers reporting quality controls

Coverage is a replication risk (14.3% vs 30% target).

Papers naming benchmarks/datasets

Coverage is usable but incomplete (21.4% vs 35% target).

Papers naming evaluation metrics

Coverage is strong (35.7% vs 35% target).

Papers with known rater population

Coverage is usable but incomplete (21.4% vs 35% target).

Papers with known annotation unit

Coverage is a replication risk (14.3% vs 35% target).

Suggested Reading Order

  1. 1. Towards Scalable Oversight via Partitioned Human Supervision

    Start here for detailed protocol reporting, including rater and quality-control evidence.

  2. 2. ATLAS: Adaptive Transfer Scaling Laws for Multilingual Pretraining, Finetuning, and Decoding the Curse of Multilinguality

    Start here for detailed protocol reporting, including rater and quality-control evidence.

  3. 3. PARL: Prompt-based Agents for Reinforcement Learning

    Start here for detailed protocol reporting, including rater and quality-control evidence.

  4. 4. Estonian Native Large Language Model Benchmark

    Include a human-eval paper to anchor calibration against automated judge settings.

  5. 5. PoSh: Using Scene Graphs To Guide LLMs-as-a-Judge For Detailed Image Descriptions

    Include a human-eval paper to anchor calibration against automated judge settings.

  6. 6. Designing and Evaluating Chain-of-Hints for Scientific Question Answering

    Adds automatic metrics with pairwise preferences for broader coverage within this hub.

  7. 7. RELOOP: Recursive Retrieval with Multi-Hop Reasoner and Planners for Heterogeneous QA

    Adds automatic metrics for broader coverage within this hub.

  8. 8. Robust Preference Alignment via Directional Neighborhood Consensus

    Adds automatic metrics with pairwise preferences for broader coverage within this hub.

Known Limitations

  • Only 14.3% of papers report quality controls; prioritize calibration/adjudication evidence.
  • Rater population is under-specified (21.4% coverage).
  • Narrative synthesis is grounded in metadata and abstracts only; full-paper implementation details are not parsed.

Research Utility Links

human_eval vs llm_as_judge

both=1, left_only=1, right_only=0

1 papers use both Human Eval and Llm As Judge.

human_eval vs automatic_metrics

both=0, left_only=2, right_only=9

0 papers use both Human Eval and Automatic Metrics.

llm_as_judge vs automatic_metrics

both=0, left_only=1, right_only=9

0 papers use both Llm As Judge and Automatic Metrics.

Benchmark Brief

Caparena

Coverage: 1 papers (7.1%)

1 papers (7.1%) mention Caparena.

Examples: PoSh: Using Scene Graphs To Guide LLMs-as-a-Judge For Detailed Image Descriptions

Benchmark Brief

Honestybench

Coverage: 1 papers (7.1%)

1 papers (7.1%) mention Honestybench.

Examples: Annotation-Efficient Universal Honesty Alignment

Benchmark Brief

HotpotQA

Coverage: 1 papers (7.1%)

1 papers (7.1%) mention HotpotQA.

Examples: RELOOP: Recursive Retrieval with Multi-Hop Reasoner and Planners for Heterogeneous QA

Metric Brief

accuracy

Coverage: 2 papers (14.3%)

2 papers (14.3%) mention accuracy.

Examples: Towards Scalable Oversight via Partitioned Human Supervision , RELOOP: Recursive Retrieval with Multi-Hop Reasoner and Planners for Heterogeneous QA

Metric Brief

calibration error

Coverage: 1 papers (7.1%)

1 papers (7.1%) mention calibration error.

Examples: A Multi-faceted Analysis of Cognitive Abilities: Evaluating Prompt Methods with Large Language Models on the CONSORT Checklist

Metric Brief

f1

Coverage: 1 papers (7.1%)

1 papers (7.1%) mention f1.

Examples: RELOOP: Recursive Retrieval with Multi-Hop Reasoner and Planners for Heterogeneous QA

Papers Published On This Date

Recent Daily Archives