arXiv:2603.03915v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated significant potential in developing Role-Playing Agents (RPAs). However, current research primarily evaluates RPAs using famous fictional characters, allowing models to rely on memory associated with character names. This dependency creates a bias that limits the generalization of RPAs to unseen personas. To address this issue, we propose an anonymous evaluation method. Experiments across multiple benchmarks reveal that anonymization significantly degrades role-playing performance, confirming that name exposure carries implicit information. Furthermore, we investigate personality augmentation to enhance role fidelity under anonymous setting. We systematically compare the efficacy of personality traits derived from human annotations versus those self-generated by the model. Our results demonstrate that incorporating personality information consistently improves RPA performance. Crucially, self-generated personalities achieve performance comparable to human-annotated ones. This work establishes a fairer evaluation protocol and validates a scalable, personality-enhanced framework for constructing robust RPAs.

arXiv:2602.13540v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are widely deployed as general-purpose problem solvers, making accurate confidence estimation critical for reliable use. Prior work on LLM calibration largely focuses on response-level confidence, which estimates the correctness of a single generated output. However, this formulation is misaligned with many practical settings where the central question is how likely a model is to solve a query overall. We show that this mismatch results from the stochastic nature of modern LLM decoding, under which single-response correctness fails to reflect underlying model capability. To address this issue, we introduce capability calibration, which targets the model's expected accuracy on a query. We formally distinguish capability calibration from response calibration and show that the two differ both theoretically and empirically. We establish an empirical evaluation setup and study a range of confidence estimation methods. Our results demonstrate that capability-calibrated confidence improves pass@$k$ prediction and inference budget allocation, establishing a foundation with potential for diverse applications.