RPCBench: A Benchmark for Proactive Premise Critique in LLM-based Recommendation
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Large language models are increasingly used as interactive recommender assistants. Their evaluation should therefore go beyond plausible item recommendation and test whether they can recognize flawed recommendation requests. Existing recommender benchmarks mainly assess ranking, generation, or preference satisfaction, while existing error-detection benchmarks are usually not grounded in recommendation-specific user and candidate evidence. To address this gap, we introduce RPCBench, a benchmark for evaluating Recommender-Premise Critique: the ability to detect, diagnose, and properly handle faulty premises in natural-language recommendation requests. RPCBench contains evidence-grounded test instances from five recommendation domains and covers ten types of premise failures. Each instance provides a visible recommendation context and a corrupted user query. We further design a fine-grained evaluation framework that measures proactive detection, error localization, post-detection handling strategy, and evidence faithfulness. Through a systematic evaluation of 11 LLMs, we find that proactive detection is the main bottleneck in Recommender-Premise Critique, and models perform worst on underspecified-premise errors. We also observe that target-critical information density matters more than redundant evidence, and that longer reasoning does not monotonically improve critique quality: performance peaks at intermediate reasoning length, while overly long reasoning is accompanied by an overthinking penalty. The code is available at https://github.com/ZhongruChen/RPCBench.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 12 of its 28 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 1 Sep 2026.
Builds on
12 of 28 references.
References · 12
- 2022Recommendation as Language Processing (RLP): A Unified Pretrain, Personalized Prompt & Predict Paradigm (P5)cited by 402
- 2023A Survey on Large Language Models for Recommendationcited by 379
- 2023Large Language Models are Zero-Shot Rankers for Recommender Systemscited by 309
- 2024ProcessBench: Identifying Process Errors in Mathematical Reasoningcited by 292
- 2019Fine-Grained Spoiler Detection from Large-Scale Review Corporacited by 77
- 2024Evaluating LLMs at Detecting Errors in LLM Responsescited by 50
- 2024Towards Next-Generation LLM-based Recommender Systems: A Survey and Beyondcited by 26
- 2025Towards Next-Generation Recommender Systems: A Benchmark for Personalized Recommendation Assistant with LLMscited by 21
- 2025How to Protect Yourself from 5G Radiation? Investigating LLM Responses to Implicit Misinformationcited by 18
- 2024RecGPT: Generative Pre-training for Text-based Recommendationcited by 9
- 2025Don't Take the Premise for Granted: Evaluating the Premise Critique Ability of Large Language Modelscited by 8
- 2025Mis-prompt: Benchmarking Large Language Models for Proactive Error Handlingcited by 2
Built on by
Not cited yet.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026RecoAtlas: From Semantic Plausibility to Set-Level Utility in LLM Recommendation Agents
- 2026Reasoning with Evidence, Not Merely Rationales: Verifiable Preference Proofs for LLM-Based Recommendation
- 2026RobustExplain: Evaluating Robustness of LLM-Based Explanation Agents for Recommendation
- 2026CALMRec: Causally Aligned Language Memory for Long-Horizon Recommendation
- 2026The Disconnect Between Better Descriptive Reasoning Trace Quality and Recommendation Effectiveness
- 2026LLM-as-a-Judge for Reliable and Explainable Offline Evaluation in Top-K Recommendation ↗
- 2026RRCM: Ranking-Driven Retrieval over Collaborative and Meta Memories for LLM Recommendation
- 2025MGFRec: Towards Reinforced Reasoning Recommendation with Multiple Groundings and Feedback