arXiv subjects

Chunjie Wu

Publications and source records attributed to Chunjie Wu.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

VeRA: Verified Reasoning Data Augmentation at Scale

The main issue with most evaluation schemes today is their "static" nature: the same problems are reused repeatedly, allowing for memorization, format exploitation, and eventual saturation. To measure genuine AI progress, we need evaluation that is robust by construction, not by post-hoc detection. In response, we propose VeRA (Verified Reasoning Data Augmentation), a framework that converts benchmark problems into executable specifications, comprising (i) a natural language template with placeholder slots, (ii) a coherent generator that samples valid configurations, and (iii) a deterministic verifier that validates parameters and calculates the corresponding correct answers for each configuration. From a single seed problem, VeRA automatically creates unlimited verified variants with reliable labels at near-zero marginal cost without human involvement. VeRA operates in two complementary modes. VeRA-E (equivalent) rewrites problems while keeping the underlying logic intact, useful for detecting memorization versus genuine reasoning. VeRA-H (hardened) systematically increases complexity while remaining verifiable, enabling reliable creation and labelling of fresh difficult tasks at the boundary of intelligence. Evaluating 16 frontier models with VeRA, we find: (i) VeRA-E improves evaluation quality and reveals contamination patterns. (ii) VeRA-H enables human-free generation of hard tasks with reliable labels. (iii) VeRA establishes verified benchmarks as a general paradigm. VeRA reconceptualizes benchmarks from static objects used until exhausted, to executable specifications generating fresh, verified instances on demand, enhancing robustness and cost-effectiveness for evaluation. With VeRA, we envision that evaluation in any verifiable domain can scale indefinitely without sacrificing label integrity. To stimulate future research, we have open-sourced all code and datasets.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2026

LPFQA: A Long-Tail Professional Forum-based Benchmark for LLM Evaluation

Large Language Models (LLMs) perform well on standard reasoning and question-answering benchmarks, yet such evaluations often fail to capture their ability to handle long-tail, expertise-intensive knowledge in real-world professional scenarios. We introduce LPFQA, a long-tail knowledge benchmark derived from authentic professional forum discussions, covering 7 academic and industrial domains with 430 curated tasks grounded in practical expertise. LPFQA evaluates specialized reasoning, domain-specific terminology understanding, and contextual interpretation, and adopts a hierarchical difficulty structure to ensure semantic clarity and uniquely identifiable answers. Experiments on over multiple mainstream LLMs reveal substantial performance gaps, particularly on tasks requiring deep domain reasoning, exposing limitations overlooked by existing benchmarks. Overall, LPFQA provides an authentic and discriminative evaluation framework that complements prior benchmarks and informs future LLM development.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2025

LLM Swiss Round: Aggregating Multi-Benchmark Performance via Competitive Swiss-System Dynamics

The rapid proliferation of Large Language Models (LLMs) and diverse specialized benchmarks necessitates a shift from fragmented, task-specific metrics to a holistic, competitive ranking system that effectively aggregates performance across multiple ability dimensions. Primarily using static scoring, current evaluation methods are fundamentally limited. They struggle to determine the proper mix ratio across diverse benchmarks, and critically, they fail to capture a model's dynamic competitive fitness or its vulnerability when confronted with sequential, high-stakes tasks. To address this, we introduce the novel Competitive Swiss-System Dynamics (CSD) framework. CSD simulates a multi-round, sequential contest where models are dynamically paired across a curated sequence of benchmarks based on their accumulated win-loss record. And Monte Carlo Simulation ($N=100,000$ iterations) is used to approximate the statistically robust Expected Win Score ($E[S_m]$), which eliminates the noise of random pairing and early-round luck. Furthermore, we implement a Failure Sensitivity Analysis by parameterizing the per-round elimination quantity ($T_k$), which allows us to profile models based on their risk appetite--distinguishing between robust generalists and aggressive specialists. We demonstrate that CSD provides a more nuanced and context-aware ranking than traditional aggregate scoring and static pairwise models, representing a vital step towards risk-informed, next-generation LLM evaluation.

cs.LG↗