As LLM-as-a-Judge emerges as a new paradigm for assessing large language models (LLMs), concerns have been raised regarding the alignment, bias, and stability of LLM evaluators. While substantial work has focused on alignment and bias, little research has concentrated on the stability of LLM evaluators. In this paper, we conduct extensive experiments involving 9 widely used LLM evaluators across 2 different evaluation settings to investigate the uncertainty in model-based LLM evaluations. We pinpoint that LLM evaluators exhibit varying uncertainty based on model families and sizes. With careful comparative analyses, we find that employing special prompting strategies, whether during inference or post-training, can alleviate evaluation uncertainty to some extent. By utilizing uncertainty to enhance LLM's reliability and detection capability in Out-Of-Distribution (OOD) data, we further fine-tune an uncertainty-aware LLM evaluator named ConfiLM using a human-annotated fine-tuning set and assess ConfiLM's OOD evaluation ability on a manually designed test set sourced from the 2024 Olympics. Experimental results demonstrate that incorporating uncertainty as additional information during the fine-tuning phase can largely improve the model's evaluation performance in OOD scenarios. Candidate A's reponse is better Describe a unique trait of the raccoon A unique trait of a Raccoon is its ability to open and close its eyes while they are closed. The evaluation process is influenced by the uncertainty of both the evaluator and the candidate model. Large language models (LLMs) have garnered increasing attention due to their unprecedented performance in various real-world applications (Zhao et al., 2023; Wang et al., 2024a). In this context, how to accurately assess the performance of a LLM becomes particularly important. This area of research includes benchmark-based evaluation, model-based evaluation, and human evaluation (Chang et al., 2024). While various benchmarks (Zellers et al., 2019; Hendrycks et al., 2021; Yang et al., 2023; Xie et al., 2024) have been proposed to measure the core abilities of LLMs in comprehension and generation, human evaluation remains the gold standard for testing overall performance due to its complexity and open-endless. However, this approach is limited by subjectivity issue (Krishna et al., 2023) and resource costs (Karpinska et al., 2021). Experiment 1: Does uncertainty exist in LLM evaluator? Experiment 2: How to mitigate uncertainty? Experiment 3: Can we utilize uncertainty? Figure 2: We conduct extensive experiments and analysis to investigate the existence, mitigation and utilization of uncertainty in model-based LLM evaluation. Uncertainty plays a key role in the evaluation process and can be leveraged to enhance the evaluator's performance in OOD scenarios. As LLM-as-a-Judge gains more attention, criticism has also emerged (Thakur et al., 2024).

Multiple choice questions (MCQs) are a popular and important task for evaluating large language models (LLMs). Based on common strategies people use when answering MCQs, the process of elimination (PoE) has been proposed as an effective problem-solving method. Existing methods to the PoE generally fall into two categories: one involves having the LLM directly select the incorrect options, while the other involves scoring the options. However, both methods incur high computational costs and often perform worse than methods that directly answer the MCQs with the option IDs. To address this issue, this paper proposes a PoE based on option ID. Specifically, our method eliminates option by selecting the option ID with the lowest probability. We conduct experiments with 10 different LLMs in zero-shot settings on 7 publicly available datasets. The experimental results demonstrate that our method significantly improves the LLM's performance. Further analysis reveals that the sequential elimination strategy can effectively enhance the LLM's reasoning ability. Additionally, we find that sequential elimination is also applicable to few-shot settings and can be combined with debias methods to further improve LLM's performance.

In this report, we present ML-Dev-Bench, a benchmark aimed at testing agentic capabilities on applied Machine Learning development tasks. While existing benchmarks focus on isolated coding tasks or Kaggle-style competitions, ML-Dev-Bench tests agents' ability to handle the full complexity of ML development workflows. The benchmark assesses performance across critical aspects including dataset handling, model training, improving existing models, debugging, and API integration with popular ML tools. We evaluate three agents -- ReAct, Openhands, and AIDE -- on a diverse set of 30 tasks, providing insights into their strengths and limitations in handling practical ML development challenges.

Zero-shot prompting techniques have significantly improved the performance of Large Language Models (LLMs). However, we lack a clear understanding of why zero-shot prompts are so effective. For example, in the prompt "Let's think step-by-step," is "think" or "step-by-step" more crucial to its success? Existing interpretability methods, such as gradient-based and attention-based approaches, are computationally intensive and restricted to open-source models. We introduce the ZIP score (Zero-shot Importance of Perturbation score), a versatile metric applicable to both open and closed-source models, based on systematic input word perturbations. Our experiments across four recent LLMs, seven widely-used prompts, and several tasks, reveal interesting patterns in word importance. For instance, while both 'step-by-step' and 'think' show high ZIP scores, which one is more influential depends on the model and task. We validate our method using controlled experiments and compare our results with human judgments, finding that proprietary models align more closely with human intuition regarding word significance. These findings enhance our understanding of LLM behavior and contribute to developing more effective zero-shot prompts and improved model analysis.

This paper presents an AI-generated review of Vision-Language-Action (VLA) models, summarizing key methodologies, findings, and future directions. The content is produced using large language models (LLMs) and is intended only for demonstration purposes. This work does not represent original research, but highlights how AI can help automate literature reviews. As AI-generated content becomes more prevalent, ensuring accuracy, reliability, and proper synthesis remains a challenge. Future research will focus on developing a structured framework for AI-assisted literature reviews, exploring techniques to enhance citation accuracy, source credibility, and contextual understanding. By examining the potential and limitations of LLM in academic writing, this study aims to contribute to the broader discussion of integrating AI into research workflows. This work serves as a preliminary step toward establishing systematic approaches for leveraging AI in literature review generation, making academic knowledge synthesis more efficient and scalable.

Well-designed prompts are crucial for enhancing Large language models' (LLMs) reasoning capabilities while aligning their outputs with task requirements across diverse domains. However, manually designed prompts require expertise and iterative experimentation. While existing prompt optimization methods aim to automate this process, they rely heavily on external references such as ground truth or by humans, limiting their applicability in real-world scenarios where such data is unavailable or costly to obtain. To address this, we propose Self-Supervised Prompt Optimization (SPO), a cost-efficient framework that discovers effective prompts for both closed and open-ended tasks without requiring external reference. Motivated by the observations that prompt quality manifests directly in LLM outputs and LLMs can effectively assess adherence to task requirements, we derive evaluation and optimization signals purely from output comparisons. Specifically, SPO selects superior prompts through pairwise output comparisons evaluated by an LLM evaluator, followed by an LLM optimizer that aligns outputs with task requirements. Extensive experiments demonstrate that SPO outperforms state-of-the-art prompt optimization methods, achieving comparable or superior results with significantly lower costs (e.g., 1.1% to 5.6% of existing methods) and fewer samples (e.g., three samples). The code is available at https://github.com/geekan/MetaGPT/blob/main/examples/spo

A large number of studies rely on closed-style multiple-choice surveys to evaluate cultural alignment in Large Language Models (LLMs). In this work, we challenge this constrained evaluation paradigm and explore more realistic, unconstrained approaches. Using the World Values Survey (WVS) and Hofstede Cultural Dimensions as case studies, we demonstrate that LLMs exhibit stronger cultural alignment in less constrained settings, where responses are not forced. Additionally, we show that even minor changes, such as reordering survey choices, lead to inconsistent outputs, exposing the limitations of closed-style evaluations. Our findings advocate for more robust and flexible evaluation frameworks that focus on specific cultural proxies, encouraging more nuanced and accurate assessments of cultural alignment in LLMs.

Model merging is a critical technique for combining the capabilities of multiple fine-tuned models without requiring additional training. While existing methods treat parameters as vectors, they overlook the intrinsic structure of linear transformation matrices - the core components that comprise the majority of model parameters. These matrices are fundamental to neural networks, mapping input representations to output features through linear combinations. Motivated by the linear representation hypothesis, we introduce task matrix and propose to Superpose Features from Task Matrix (SFTM), a novel approach that superposes features from individual task models into a merged model. SFTM employs singular value decomposition to identify feature bases of linear transformation matrices and solves a linear system to optimally combine them while preserving input-output mappings from individual task models. Extensive experiments on vision transformers and language models demonstrate that our method consistently outperforms existing methods, achieving superior performance and enhanced out-of-distribution generalization.

Contextual memory integration remains a high challenge in the development of language models, particularly in tasks that require maintaining coherence over extended sequences. Traditional approaches, such as self-attention mechanisms and memory-augmented architectures, often prioritize short-term dependencies, leading to fragmentation and inconsistency in long-range contextual understanding. Inspired by principles of synaptic plasticity observed in biological neural systems, a novel mechanism, Synaptic Resonance, is introduced to dynamically reinforce relevant memory pathways during training and inference. Unlike static memory representations, this mechanism continuously adjusts synaptic weight matrices based on contextual relevance, allowing for improved information retention without excessive computational overhead. Evaluations conducted on an open-source language model demonstrate reductions in perplexity, enhancements in contextual coherence, and increased robustness against input noise, highlighting the effectiveness of reinforcement-driven memory modulation. Comparative analysis against baseline models further reveals that the proposed approach achieves higher memory retention efficiency while maintaining computational feasibility. The architectural modifications integrate seamlessly into existing transformer-based frameworks, ensuring stable convergence and efficient inference without sacrificing scalability. Applications benefiting from improved long-term contextual consistency, such as dialogue systems and document summarization, stand to gain from this approach. Empirical findings suggest that dynamically reinforced memory pathways offer a promising alternative to conventional memory mechanisms, addressing longstanding limitations in extended sequence modeling.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable success in various tasks such as natural language understanding, text summarization, and machine translation. However, their general-purpose nature often limits their effectiveness in domain-specific applications that require specialized knowledge, such as healthcare, chemistry, or legal analysis. To address this, researchers have explored diverse methods to enhance LLMs by integrating domain-specific knowledge. In this survey, we provide a comprehensive overview of these methods, which we categorize into four key approaches: dynamic knowledge injection, static knowledge embedding, modular adapters, and prompt optimization. Each approach offers unique mechanisms to equip LLMs with domain expertise, balancing trade-offs between flexibility, scalability, and efficiency. We discuss how these methods enable LLMs to tackle specialized tasks, compare their advantages and disadvantages, evaluate domain-specific LLMs against general LLMs, and highlight the challenges and opportunities in this emerging field. For those interested in delving deeper into this area, we also summarize the commonly used datasets and benchmarks. To keep researchers updated on the latest studies, we maintain an open-source at: https://github.com/abilliyb/Knowledge_Injection_Survey_Papers, dedicated to documenting research in the field of specialized LLM.