mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Agentic AI for Human Resources: LLM-Driven Candidate Assessment

arXiv 2603.26710 ↗First posted 17 Mar 2026cs.IR cs.AI cs.CLcited by 2

On the map: LLM agents and tool use → General LLM agent frameworks and benchmarks

Abstract (arXiv)

In this work, we present a modular and interpretable framework that uses Large Language Models (LLMs) to automate candidate assessment in recruitment. The system integrates diverse sources, including job descriptions, CVs, interview transcripts, and HR feedback; to generate structured evaluation reports that mirror expert judgment. Unlike traditional ATS tools that rely on keyword matching or shallow scoring, our approach employs role-specific, LLM-generated rubrics and a multi-agent architecture to perform fine-grained, criteria-driven evaluations. The framework outputs detailed assessment reports, candidate comparisons, and ranked recommendations that are transparent, auditable, and suitable for real-world hiring workflows. Beyond rubric-based analysis, we introduce an LLM-Driven Active Listwise Tournament mechanism for candidate ranking. Instead of noisy pairwise comparisons or inconsistent independent scoring, the LLM ranks small candidate subsets (mini-tournaments), and these listwise permutations are aggregated using a Plackett-Luce model. An active-learning loop selects the most informative subsets, producing globally coherent and sample-efficient rankings. This adaptation of listwise LLM preference modeling (previously explored in financial asset ranking) provides a principled and highly interpretable methodology for large-scale candidate ranking in talent acquisition.

Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in General LLM agent frameworks and benchmarks, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 6 of its 17 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 17 Mar 2026.

Builds on

6 of 17 references.

References · 6

  1. 2022Large Language Models are Zero-Shot Reasonerscited by 4,374
  2. 2023Large Language Models are Effective Text Rankers with Pairwise Ranking Promptingcited by 307
  3. 2019Mitigating Bias in Algorithmic Hiring: Evaluating Claims and Practicescited by 174
  4. 2025TrustJudge: Inconsistencies of LLM-as-a-Judge and How to Alleviate Themcited by 20
  5. 2024LLM-RankFusion: Mitigating Intrinsic Inconsistency in LLM-based Rankingcited by 16
  6. 2023JobRecoGPT -- Explainable job recommendations using LLMscited by 6

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 2.

2 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025AI Hiring with LLMs: A Context-Aware and Explainable Multi-Agent Framework for Resume Screening
  2. 2025Let's Get You Hired: A Job Seeker's Perspective on Multi-Agent Recruitment Systems for Explaining Hiring Decisions
  3. 2026From Matching Models to Recruiting Agents: A Systematized Narrative Review of AI Recruitment Systems, Evaluation, and Governance
  4. 2025Leveraging LLMs as Meta-Judges: A Multi-Agent Framework for Evaluating LLM Judgments
  5. 2025Zara: An LLM-based Candidate Interview Feedback System
  6. 2024Application of LLM Agents in Recruitment: A Novel Framework for Resume Screening
  7. 2025When AIs Judge AIs: The Rise of Agent-as-a-Judge Evaluation for LLMs
  8. 2026Evaluating LLM Behavior in Hiring: Implicit Weights, Fairness Across Groups, and Alignment with Human Preferences