JADE: Expert-Grounded Dynamic Evaluation for Open-Ended Professional Tasks
On the map: LLM agents and tool use → General LLM agent frameworks and benchmarks
Abstract (arXiv)
Evaluating agentic AI on open-ended professional tasks faces a fundamental dilemma between rigor and flexibility. Static rubrics provide rigorous, reproducible assessment but fail to accommodate diverse valid response strategies, while LLM-as-a-judge approaches adapt to individual responses yet suffer from instability and bias. Human experts address this dilemma by combining domain-grounded principles with dynamic, claim-level assessment. Inspired by this process, we propose JADE, a two-layer evaluation framework. Layer 1 encodes expert knowledge as a predefined set of evaluation skills, providing stable evaluation criteria. Layer 2 performs report-specific, claim-level evaluation to flexibly assess diverse reasoning strategies, with evidence-dependency gating to invalidate conclusions built on refuted claims. Experiments on BizBench show that JADE improves evaluation stability and reveals critical agent failure modes missed by holistic LLM-based evaluators. We further demonstrate strong alignment with expert-authored rubrics and effective transfer to HealthBench and DR.BENCH, covering medical and 10-domain professional evaluation settings. Code and data are available at https://github.com/smiling-world/JADE.
Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in General LLM agent frameworks and benchmarks, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 40 of its 51 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 6 Feb 2026.
Builds on
40 of 51 references.
Closest ancestors · 4
Same direction, newest first
- 2025Large Language Model Agent: A Survey on Methodology, Applications and Challenges27 Mar
- 2025Survey on Evaluation of LLM-based Agents20 Mar
- 2024τ-bench: A Benchmark for Tool-Agent-User Interaction in Real-World Domains17 Jun
- 2023A Survey on Large Language Model based Autonomous Agents22 Aug
Other references · 36
- 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,712
- 2023Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arenacited by 8,393
- 2025Qwen3 Technical Reportcited by 8,195
- 2023SWE-bench: Can Language Models Resolve Real-World GitHub Issues?cited by 3,193
- 2022Constitutional AI: Harmlessness from AI Feedbackcited by 2,950
- 2023WebArena: A Realistic Web Environment for Building Autonomous Agentscited by 1,908
- 2022WebShop: Towards Scalable Real-World Web Interaction with Grounded Language Agentscited by 1,197
- 2023Large Language Models are not Fair Evaluatorscited by 1,050
- 2025DeepSeek-V3.2: Pushing the Frontier of Open Large Language Modelscited by 755
- 2023A Comprehensive Overview of Large Language Modelscited by 639
- 2025BrowseComp: A Simple Yet Challenging Benchmark for Browsing Agentscited by 616
- 2023RLAIF vs. RLHF: Scaling Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback with AI Feedbackcited by 615
24 more
- 2025τ2-Bench: Evaluating Conversational Agents in a Dual-Control Environmentcited by 558
- 2024LLMs-as-Judges: A Comprehensive Survey on LLM-based Evaluation Methodscited by 451
- 2025HealthBench: Evaluating Large Language Models Towards Improved Human Healthcited by 385
- 2024Measuring short-form factuality in large language modelscited by 345
- 2025DeepResearch Bench: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Deep Research Agentscited by 236
- 2025BrowseComp-Plus: A More Fair and Transparent Evaluation Benchmark of Deep-Research Agentcited by 183
- 2024AssistantBench: Can Web Agents Solve Realistic and Time-Consuming Tasks?cited by 155
- 2025BrowseComp-ZH: Benchmarking Web Browsing Ability of Large Language Models in Chinesecited by 139
- 2025CodeElo: Benchmarking Competition-level Code Generation of LLMs with Human-comparable Elo Ratingscited by 109
- 2025ResearchBench: Benchmarking LLMs in Scientific Discovery via Inspiration-Based Task Decompositioncited by 57
- 2025FutureX: An Advanced Live Benchmark for LLM Agents in Future Predictioncited by 55
- 2025StockBench: Can LLM Agents Trade Stocks Profitably In Real-world Markets?cited by 43
- 2025ResearcherBench: Evaluating Deep AI Research Systems on the Frontiers of Scientific Inquirycited by 30
- 2025ECom-Bench: Can LLM Agent Resolve Real-World E-commerce Customer Support Issues?cited by 27
- 2025ShoppingBench: A Real-World Intent-Grounded Shopping Benchmark for LLM-based Agentscited by 26
- 2025FinSearchComp: Towards a Realistic, Expert-Level Evaluation of Financial Search and Reasoningcited by 26
- 2025DeepResearch Arena: The First Exam of LLMs' Research Abilities via Seminar-Grounded Taskscited by 24
- 2025ExpertLongBench: Benchmarking Language Models on Expert-Level Long-Form Generation Tasks with Structured Checklistscited by 22
- 2025FinDeepResearch: Evaluating Deep Research Agents in Rigorous Financial Analysiscited by 13
- 2025FinResearchBench: A Logic Tree based Agent-as-a-Judge Evaluation Framework for Financial Research Agentscited by 11
- 2025ScholarSearch: Benchmarking Scholar Searching Ability of LLMscited by 7
- 2025EcomBench: Towards Holistic Evaluation of Foundation Agents in E-commercecited by 7
- 2025Skewed Score: A statistical framework to assess autograderscited by 6
- 2025Understanding DeepResearch via Reportscited by 6
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 2.
2 papers.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026Agent-as-a-Judge
- 2025Auto-Eval Judge: Towards a General Agentic Framework for Task Completion Evaluation
- 2024Agent-as-a-Judge: Evaluate Agents with Agents
- 2025Multi-Agent-as-Judge: Aligning LLM-Agent-Based Automated Evaluation with Multi-Dimensional Human Evaluation
- 2026OccuBench: Evaluating AI Agents on Real-World Professional Tasks via Language Environment Simulation
- 2026A Framework for Evaluating Agentic Skills at Scale
- 2025When AIs Judge AIs: The Rise of Agent-as-a-Judge Evaluation for LLMs
- 2026Counsel: A Meta-Evaluation Dataset for Agentic Tasks