mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

CompliBench: Benchmarking LLM Judges for Compliance Violation Detection in Dialogue Systems

arXiv 2604.12312 ↗First posted 14 Apr 2026cs.CLcited by 6

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

As Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed as task-oriented agents in enterprise environments, ensuring their strict adherence to complex, domain-specific operational guidelines is critical. While utilizing an LLM-as-a-Judge is a promising solution for scalable evaluation, the reliability of these judges in detecting specific policy violations remains largely unexplored. This gap is primarily due to the lack of a systematic data generation method, which has been hindered by the extensive cost of fine-grained human annotation and the difficulty of synthesizing realistic agent violations. In this paper, we introduce CompliBench, a novel benchmark designed to evaluate the ability of LLM judges to detect and localize guideline violations in multi-turn dialogues. To overcome data scarcity, we develop a scalable, automated data generation pipeline that simulates user-agent interactions. Our controllable flaw injection process automatically yields precise ground-truth labels for the violated guideline and the exact conversation turn, while an adversarial search method ensures these introduced perturbations are highly challenging. Our comprehensive evaluation reveals that current state-of-the-art proprietary LLMs struggle significantly with this task. In addition, we demonstrate that a small-scale judge model fine-tuned on our synthesized data outperforms leading LLMs and generalizes well to unseen business domains, highlighting our pipeline as an effective foundation for training robust generative reward models.

Key facts. Cited by 6 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 24 of its 36 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 14 Apr 2026.

Builds on

24 of 36 references.

References · 24

  1. 2022Survey of Hallucination in Natural Language Generationcited by 2,075
  2. 2023A Survey on Hallucination in Large Language Models: Principles, Taxonomy, Challenges, and Open Questionscited by 1,601
  3. 2024τ-bench: A Benchmark for Tool-Agent-User Interaction in Real-World Domainscited by 1,402
  4. 2025τ2-Bench: Evaluating Conversational Agents in a Dual-Control Environmentcited by 627
  5. 2026GLM-5: from Vibe Coding to Agentic Engineeringcited by 587
  6. 2024InternLM2 Technical Reportcited by 397
  7. 2024JudgeBench: A Benchmark for Evaluating LLM-based Judgescited by 318
  8. 2025Inference-Time Scaling for Generalist Reward Modelingcited by 239
  9. 2025Skywork-Reward-V2: Scaling Preference Data Curation via Human-AI Synergycited by 214
  10. 2025Generalizing Verifiable Instruction Followingcited by 194
  11. 2024Advancing LLM Reasoning Generalists with Preference Treescited by 192
  12. 2024RM-Bench: Benchmarking Reward Models of Language Models with Subtlety and Stylecited by 176
12 more
  1. 2023FollowBench: A Multi-level Fine-grained Constraints Following Benchmark for Large Language Modelscited by 117
  2. 2024How to Evaluate Reward Models for RLHFcited by 88
  3. 2024MT-Eval: A Multi-Turn Capabilities Evaluation Benchmark for Large Language Modelscited by 81
  4. 2024Uncertainty-aware Reward Model: Teaching Reward Models to Know What is Unknowncited by 74
  5. 2024CompassJudger-1: All-in-one Judge Model Helps Model Evaluation and Evolutioncited by 42
  6. 2025ECom-Bench: Can LLM Agent Resolve Real-World E-commerce Customer Support Issues?cited by 27
  7. 2025The Law of Knowledge Overshadowing: Towards Understanding, Predicting, and Preventing LLM Hallucinationcited by 23
  8. 2023Can ChatGPT Detect Intent? Evaluating Large Language Models for Spoken Language Understandingcited by 21
  9. 2024GLIDER: Grading LLM Interactions and Decisions using Explainable Rankingcited by 14
  10. 2024Dial-In LLM: Human-Aligned LLM-in-the-loop Intent Clustering for Customer Service Dialoguescited by 11
  11. 2026Beyond IVR: Benchmarking Customer Support LLM Agents for Business-Adherencecited by 11
  12. 2024Fictitious Synthetic Data Can Improve LLM Factuality via Prerequisite Learningcited by 7

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 6.

6 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025Efficient LLM Safety Evaluation through Multi-Agent Debate
  2. 2025MEDAL: A Framework for Benchmarking LLMs as Multilingual Open-Domain Dialogue Evaluators
  3. 2025DICE-BENCH: Evaluating the Tool-Use Capabilities of Large Language Models in Multi-Round, Multi-Party Dialogues
  4. 2026StabilityBench: Benchmarking Instability in LLMs
  5. 2026Towards Proactive Detection of User-Side Implicit Conflicts in Human-LLM Dialogue
  6. 2026Catching One in Five: LLM-as-Judge Blind Spots in Production Multi-Turn Transaction Agents
  7. 2025Refining Input Guardrails: Enhancing LLM-as-a-Judge Efficiency Through Chain-of-Thought Fine-Tuning and Alignment
  8. 2025EU-Agent-Bench: Measuring Illegal Behavior of LLM Agents Under EU Law