3 citations · 13 across the 21 of their papers we have counts for
25 papers
Stop Guessing When to Stop Testing: Efficient Model Evaluation with Just Enough Data
Ofir Arviv, Kristjan Greenewald, Yotam Perlitz +3
The inherent rigidity of fixed-size benchmarks makes them an inefficient tool for model evaluation. Diverse evaluation objectives, including model ranking, model selection and test…
AgentBeats: Agentifying Agent Assessment for Openness, Standardization, and Reproducibility
Xiaoyuan Liu, Jianhong Tu, Yuqi Chen +26
Agent systems are advancing quickly across domains, but their evaluation remains fragmented. Most benchmarks rely on fixed, LLM-centric harnesses that require heavy integration, cr…
A Matter of TASTE: Improving Coverage and Difficulty of Agent Benchmarks
Tomer Keren, Nitay Calderon, Asaf Yehudai +3
As agent capabilities advance, existing benchmarks, such as -Bench, are becoming increasingly saturated. Yet constructing new benchmark tasks remains complex, costly, and labo…
Agentic CLEAR: Automating Multi-Level Evaluation of LLM Agents
Asaf Yehudai, Lilach Eden, Michal Shmueli-Scheuer
Agentic systems are becoming more capable: agents define strategies, take actions, and interact with different environments. This autonomy poses serious challenges for overseeing a…
Time to REFLECT: Can We Trust LLM Judges for Evidence-based Research Agents?
Leyao Wang, Yanan He, Peng Chen +5
Deep research agents increasingly automate complex information-seeking tasks, producing evidence-grounded reports via multi-step reasoning, tool use, and synthesis. Their growing r…
CUBE: A Standard for Unifying Agent Benchmarks
Alexandre Lacoste, Nicolas Gontier, Oleh Shliazhko +23
The proliferation of agent benchmarks has created critical fragmentation that threatens research productivity. Each new benchmark requires substantial custom integration, creating…