❌

Normal view

Received — 8 April 2026 ⏭ cs.AI, q-bio.NC updates on arXiv.org

Xpertbench: Expert Level Tasks with Rubrics-Based Evaluation

arXiv:2604.02368v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: As Large Language Models (LLMs) exhibit plateauing performance on conventional benchmarks, a pivotal challenge persists: evaluating their proficiency in complex, open-ended tasks characterizing genuine expert-level cognition. Existing frameworks suffer from narrow domain coverage, reliance on generalist tasks, or self-evaluation biases. To bridge this gap, we present XpertBench, a high-fidelity benchmark engineered to assess LLMs across authentic professional domains. XpertBench consists of 1,346 meticulously curated tasks across 80 categories, spanning finance, healthcare, legal services, education, and dual-track research (STEM and Humanities). These tasks are derived from over 1,000 submissions by domain experts--including researchers from elite institutions and practitioners with extensive clinical or industrial experience--ensuring superior ecological validity. Each task uses detailed rubrics with mostly 15-40 weighted checkpoints to assess professional rigor. To facilitate scalable yet human-aligned assessment, we introduce ShotJudge, a novel evaluation paradigm that employs LLM judges calibrated with expert few-shot exemplars to mitigate self-rewarding biases. Our empirical evaluation of state-of-the-art LLMs reveals a pronounced performance ceiling: even leading models achieve a peak success rate of only ~66%, with a mean score around 55%. Models also exhibit domain-specific divergence, showing non-overlapping strengths in quantitative reasoning versus linguistic synthesis.. These findings underscore a significant "expert-gap" in current AI systems and establish XpertBench as a critical instrument for navigating the transition from general-purpose assistants to specialized professional collaborators.

Beyond Message Passing: A Semantic View of Agent Communication Protocols

arXiv:2604.02369v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Agent communication protocols are becoming critical infrastructure for large language model (LLM) systems that must use tools, coordinate with other agents, and operate across heterogeneous environments. This work presents a human-inspired perspective on this emerging landscape by organizing agent communication into three layers: communication, syntactic, and semantic. Under this framework, we systematically analyze 18 representative protocols and compare how they support reliable transport, structured interaction, and meaning-level coordination. Our analysis shows a clear imbalance in current protocol design. Most protocols provide increasingly mature support for transport, streaming, schema definition, and lifecycle management, but offer limited protocol-level mechanisms for clarification, context alignment, and verification. As a result, semantic responsibilities are often pushed into prompts, wrappers, or application-specific orchestration logic, creating hidden interoperability and maintenance costs. To make this gap actionable, we further identify major forms of technical debt in today's protocol ecosystem and distill practical guidance for selecting protocols under different deployment settings. We conclude by outlining a research agenda for interoperable, secure, and semantically robust agent ecosystems that move beyond message passing toward shared understanding.
Received — 4 April 2026 ⏭ cs.AI, q-bio.NC updates on arXiv.org

EvoSkills: Self-Evolving Agent Skills via Co-Evolutionary Verification

arXiv:2604.01687v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Anthropic proposes the concept of skills for LLM agents to tackle multi-step professional tasks that simple tool invocations cannot address. A tool is a single, self-contained function, whereas a skill is a structured bundle of interdependent multi-file artifacts. Currently, skill generation is not only label-intensive due to manual authoring, but also may suffer from human--machine cognitive misalignment, which can lead to degraded agent performance, as evidenced by evaluations on SkillsBench. Therefore, we aim to enable agents to autonomously generate skills. However, existing self-evolving methods designed for tools cannot be directly applied to skills due to their increased complexity. To address these issues, we propose EvoSkills, a self-evolving skills framework that enables agents to autonomously construct complex, multi-file skill packages. Specifically, EvoSkills couples a Skill Generator that iteratively refines skills with a Surrogate Verifier that co-evolves to provide informative and actionable feedback without access to ground-truth test content. On SkillsBench, EvoSkills achieves the highest pass rate among five baselines on both Claude Code and Codex, and also exhibits strong generalization capabilities to six additional LLMs.
Received — 5 March 2026 ⏭ cs.AI, q-bio.NC updates on arXiv.org

RubricBench: Aligning Model-Generated Rubrics with Human Standards

arXiv:2603.01562v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: As Large Language Model (LLM) alignment evolves from simple completions to complex, highly sophisticated generation, Reward Models are increasingly shifting toward rubric-guided evaluation to mitigate surface-level biases. However, the community lacks a unified benchmark to assess this evaluation paradigm, as existing benchmarks lack both the discriminative complexity and the ground-truth rubric annotations required for rigorous analysis. To bridge this gap, we introduce RubricBench, a curated benchmark with 1,147 pairwise comparisons specifically designed to assess the reliability of rubric-based evaluation. Our construction employs a multi-dimensional filtration pipeline to target hard samples featuring nuanced input complexity and misleading surface bias, augmenting each with expert-annotated, atomic rubrics derived strictly from instructions. Comprehensive experiments reveal a substantial capability gap between human-annotated and model-generated rubrics, indicating that even state-of-the-art models struggle to autonomously specify valid evaluation criteria, lagging considerably behind human-guided performance.
Received — 25 February 2026 ⏭ cs.AI, q-bio.NC updates on arXiv.org

Give Users the Wheel: Towards Promptable Recommendation Paradigm

arXiv:2602.18929v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Conventional sequential recommendation models have achieved remarkable success in mining implicit behavioral patterns. However, these architectures remain structurally blind to explicit user intent: they struggle to adapt when a user's immediate goal (e.g., expressed via a natural language prompt) deviates from their historical habits. While Large Language Models (LLMs) offer the semantic reasoning to interpret such intent, existing integration paradigms force a dilemma: LLM-as-a-recommender paradigm sacrifices the efficiency and collaborative precision of ID-based retrieval, while Reranking methods are inherently bottlenecked by the recall capabilities of the underlying model. In this paper, we propose Decoupled Promptable Sequential Recommendation (DPR), a model-agnostic framework that empowers conventional sequential backbones to natively support Promptable Recommendation, the ability to dynamically steer the retrieval process using natural language without abandoning collaborative signals. DPR modulates the latent user representation directly within the retrieval space. To achieve this, we introduce a Fusion module to align the collaborative and semantic signals, a Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) architecture that disentangles the conflicting gradients from positive and negative steering, and a three-stage training strategy that progressively aligns the semantic space of prompts with the collaborative space. Extensive experiments on real-world datasets demonstrate that DPR significantly outperforms state-of-the-art baselines in prompt-guided tasks while maintaining competitive performance in standard sequential recommendation scenarios.
❌