Skip to content
← Back to explorer

HFEPX Metric Hub

Pass@1 Metric Papers

Updated from current HFEPX corpus (Mar 8, 2026). 12 papers are grouped in this metric page.

Read Full Context

Updated from current HFEPX corpus (Mar 8, 2026). 12 papers are grouped in this metric page. Common evaluation modes: Automatic Metrics, Simulation Env. Most common rater population: Domain Experts. Common annotation unit: Trajectory. Frequently cited benchmark: SWE-bench. Common metric signal: pass@1. 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 Feb 15, 2026.

Papers: 12 Last published: Feb 15, 2026 Global RSS

Researcher Quick Triage

Use this page to compare metric behavior across protocols and benchmarks before selecting your reporting stack. Quality band: Medium .

Metric Coverage

50.0%

6 sampled papers include metric names.

Benchmark Anchoring

41.7%

Papers with explicit dataset/benchmark anchors for fair comparison.

Quality Controls

0.0%

0 papers report calibration/adjudication/IAA controls.

  • 12 papers are not low-signal flagged in this sample.
  • Use the protocol matrix below to avoid comparing metrics across incompatible eval setups.

Primary action: Treat this as directional signal only; metric reporting is present but benchmark anchoring is still thin.

Why This Matters (Expanded)

Why This Matters For Eval Research

  • 42.9% of papers report explicit human-feedback signals, led by expert verification.
  • automatic metrics appears in 33.3% of papers in this hub.
  • SWE-bench is a recurring benchmark anchor for cross-paper comparisons in this page.
Metric Notes (Expanded)

Metric-Driven Protocol Takeaways

  • Quality-control reporting is sparse in this slice; prioritize papers with explicit calibration or adjudication steps.
  • Rater context is mostly domain experts, and annotation is commonly trajectory-level annotation; use this to scope replication staffing.
  • Stratify by benchmark (SWE-bench vs SWE-bench Verified) before comparing methods.

Metric Interpretation

  • pass@1 is reported in 100% of hub papers (7/12); compare with a secondary metric before ranking methods.
  • cost is reported in 28.6% of hub papers (2/12); compare with a secondary metric before ranking methods.

Benchmark Context

  • SWE-bench appears in 28.6% of hub papers (2/12); use this cohort for benchmark-matched comparisons.
  • SWE-bench Verified appears in 28.6% of hub papers (2/12); use this cohort for benchmark-matched comparisons.

Start Here (Metric-Reliable First 6)

Ranked for metric reporting completeness and comparability.

Metric Protocol Matrix (Top 10)

Compare metric, benchmark, and evaluation context side by side.

Paper Metrics Benchmarks Eval Modes Quality Controls
AD-Bench: A Real-World, Trajectory-Aware Advertising Analytics Benchmark for LLM Agents

Feb 15, 2026

Pass@1, Pass@3 Ad Bench Simulation Env Not reported
SWE-Protégé: Learning to Selectively Collaborate With an Expert Unlocks Small Language Models as Software Engineering Agents

Feb 25, 2026

Pass@1, Latency SWE Bench, SWE Bench Verified Automatic Metrics Not reported
Embodied Task Planning via Graph-Informed Action Generation with Large Language Model

Jan 29, 2026

Pass@1, Cost ALFWorld Simulation Env Not reported
Critique-GRPO: Advancing LLM Reasoning with Natural Language and Numerical Feedback

Jun 3, 2025

Pass@1 AIME Automatic Metrics Not reported
APEX-Agents

Jan 20, 2026

Pass@1 Not reported Automatic Metrics Not reported
Lookahead Tree-Based Rollouts for Enhanced Trajectory-Level Exploration in Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards

Oct 28, 2025

Pass@1 Not reported Simulation Env Not reported
Structurally Aligned Subtask-Level Memory for Software Engineering Agents

Feb 25, 2026

Not reported SWE Bench Automatic Metrics Not reported
$V_1$: Unifying Generation and Self-Verification for Parallel Reasoners

Mar 4, 2026

Not reported Not reported Not reported Not reported
BeamPERL: Parameter-Efficient RL with Verifiable Rewards Specializes Compact LLMs for Structured Beam Mechanics Reasoning

Mar 4, 2026

Not reported Not reported Not reported Not reported
Confidence-Calibrated Small-Large Language Model Collaboration for Cost-Efficient Reasoning

Mar 4, 2026

Not reported Not reported Not reported Not reported
Researcher Workflow (Detailed)

Checklist

  • Moderate: Papers with explicit human feedback

    Coverage is usable but incomplete (42.9% vs 45% target).

  • Gap: Papers reporting quality controls

    Coverage is a replication risk (0% vs 30% target).

  • Strong: Papers naming benchmarks/datasets

    Coverage is strong (71.4% vs 35% target).

  • Strong: Papers naming evaluation metrics

    Coverage is strong (100% vs 35% target).

  • Strong: Papers with known rater population

    Coverage is strong (42.9% vs 35% target).

  • Strong: Papers with known annotation unit

    Coverage is strong (71.4% vs 35% target).

Strengths

  • Most papers provide measurable evaluation context (71.4% benchmarks, 100% metrics).
  • Agentic evaluation appears in 85.7% of papers.
  • Rater population and annotation-unit details are frequently specified.

Known Gaps

  • Only 0% of papers report quality controls; prioritize calibration/adjudication evidence.

Suggested Next Analyses

  • Stratify by benchmark (SWE-bench vs SWE-bench Verified) before comparing methods.
  • Track metric sensitivity by reporting both pass@1 and cost.

Recommended Queries

Known Limitations
  • Only 0% of papers report quality controls; prioritize calibration/adjudication evidence.
  • Narrative synthesis is grounded in metadata and abstracts only; full-paper implementation details are not parsed.
  • Cross-page comparisons should be benchmark- and metric-matched to avoid protocol confounding.
Research Utility Snapshot (Detailed)

Top Metrics

  • Pass@1 (7)
  • Cost (2)
  • Coherence (1)
  • Latency (1)

Evaluation Modes

  • Automatic Metrics (4)
  • Simulation Env (3)

Top Benchmarks

  • SWE Bench (2)
  • SWE Bench Verified (2)
  • Ad Bench (1)
  • AIME (1)

Agentic Mix

  • Long Horizon (6)

Top Papers Reporting This Metric

Related Metric Hubs

Need human evaluators for your AI research? Scale annotation with expert AI Trainers.