Current benchmarks for Large Language Models (LLMs) primarily focus on performance metrics, often failing to capture the nuanced behavioral characteristics that differentiate them. This paper introduces a novel ``Behavioral Fingerprinting'' framework designed to move beyond traditional evaluation by creating a multi-faceted profile of a model's intrinsic cognitive and interactive styles. Using a curated \textit{Diagnostic Prompt Suite} and an innovative, automated evaluation pipeline where a powerful LLM acts as an impartial judge, we analyze eighteen models across capability tiers. Our results reveal a critical divergence in the LLM landscape: while core capabilities like abstract and causal reasoning are converging among top models, alignment-related behaviors such as sycophancy and semantic robustness vary dramatically. We further document a cross-model default persona clustering (ISTJ/ESTJ) that likely reflects common alignment incentives. Taken together, this suggests that a model's interactive nature is not an emergent property of its scale or reasoning power, but a direct consequence of specific, and highly variable, developer alignment strategies. Our framework provides a reproducible and scalable methodology for uncovering these deep behavioral differences. Project: https://github.com/JarvisPei/Behavioral-Fingerprinting

LLM app stores are quickly emerging as platforms that gather a wide range of intelligent applications based on LLMs, giving users many choices for content creation, coding support, education, and more. However, the current methods for ranking and recommending apps in these stores mostly rely on static metrics like user activity and favorites, which makes it hard for users to efficiently find high-quality apps. To address these challenges, we propose LaQual, an automated framework for evaluating the quality of LLM apps. LaQual consists of three main stages: first, it labels and classifies LLM apps in a hierarchical way to accurately match them to different scenarios; second, it uses static indicators, such as time-weighted user engagement and functional capability metrics, to filter out low-quality apps; and third, it conducts a dynamic, scenario-adaptive evaluation, where the LLM itself generates scenario-specific evaluation metrics, scoring rules, and tasks for a thorough quality assessment. Experiments on a popular LLM app store show that LaQual is effective. Its automated scores are highly consistent with human judgments (with Spearman's rho of 0.62 and p=0.006 in legal consulting, and rho of 0.60 and p=0.009 in travel planning). By effectively screening, LaQual can reduce the pool of candidate LLM apps by 66.7% to 81.3%. User studies further confirm that LaQual significantly outperforms baseline systems in decision confidence, comparison efficiency (with average scores of 5.45 compared to 3.30), and the perceived value of its evaluation reports (4.75 versus 2.25). Overall, these results demonstrate that LaQual offers a scalable, objective, and user-centered solution for finding and recommending high-quality LLM apps in real-world use cases.

Generative poetry systems require effective tools for data engineering and automatic evaluation, particularly to assess how well a poem adheres to versification rules, such as the correct alternation of stressed and unstressed syllables and the presence of rhymes. In this work, we introduce the Russian Poetry Scansion Tool library designed for stress mark placement in Russian-language syllabo-tonic poetry, rhyme detection, and identification of defects of poeticness. Additionally, we release RIFMA -- a dataset of poem fragments spanning various genres and forms, annotated with stress marks. This dataset can be used to evaluate the capability of modern large language models to accurately place stress marks in poetic texts. The published resources provide valuable tools for researchers and practitioners in the field of creative generative AI, facilitating advancements in the development and evaluation of generative poetry systems.

Personalized text generation presents a specialized mechanism for delivering content that is specific to a user's personal context. While the research progress in this area has been rapid, evaluation still presents a challenge. Traditional automated metrics such as BLEU and ROUGE primarily measure lexical similarity to human-written references, and are not able to distinguish personalization from other subtle semantic aspects, thus falling short of capturing the nuances of personalized generated content quality. On the other hand, human judgments are costly to obtain, especially in the realm of personalized evaluation. Inspired by these challenges, we explore the use of large language models (LLMs) for evaluating personalized text generation, and examine their ability to understand nuanced user context. We present AuPEL, a novel evaluation method that distills three major semantic aspects of the generated text: personalization, quality and relevance, and automatically measures these aspects. To validate the effectiveness of AuPEL, we design carefully controlled experiments and compare the accuracy of the evaluation judgments made by LLMs versus that of judgements made by human annotators, and conduct rigorous analyses of the consistency and sensitivity of the proposed metric. We find that, compared to existing evaluation metrics, AuPEL not only distinguishes and ranks models based on their personalization abilities more accurately, but also presents commendable consistency and efficiency for this task. Our work suggests that using LLMs as the evaluators of personalized text generation is superior to traditional text similarity metrics, even though interesting new challenges still remain.

We introduce RAGAs (Retrieval Augmented Generation Assessment), a framework for reference-free evaluation of Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG) pipelines. RAG systems are composed of a retrieval and an LLM based generation module, and provide LLMs with knowledge from a reference textual database, which enables them to act as a natural language layer between a user and textual databases, reducing the risk of hallucinations. Evaluating RAG architectures is, however, challenging because there are several dimensions to consider: the ability of the retrieval system to identify relevant and focused context passages, the ability of the LLM to exploit such passages in a faithful way, or the quality of the generation itself. With RAGAs, we put forward a suite of metrics which can be used to evaluate these different dimensions \textit{without having to rely on ground truth human annotations}. We posit that such a framework can crucially contribute to faster evaluation cycles of RAG architectures, which is especially important given the fast adoption of LLMs.

In this paper we promote introducing software verification and control flow graph similarity measurement in automated evaluation of students' programs. We present a new grading framework that merges results obtained by combination of these two approaches with results obtained by automated testing, leading to improved quality and precision of automated grading. These two approaches are also useful in providing a comprehensible feedback that can help students to improve the quality of their programs We also present our corresponding tools that are publicly available and open source. The tools are based on LLVM low-level intermediate code representation, so they could be applied to a number of programming languages. Experimental evaluation of the proposed grading framework is performed on a corpus of university students' programs written in programming language C. Results of the experiments show that automatically generated grades are highly correlated with manually determined grades suggesting that the presented tools can find real-world applications in studying and grading.