Evaluating LLM Creativity through Long-Tail Performance
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Creativity benchmarks for large language models (LLMs) vary widely in task and metric design. This raises the question of whether they capture a common notion of creativity. We propose that this shared target can be formalized as task-specific performance in the long tail of a reference input-output distribution, which describes how common input-output pairs are relative to a chosen source of text. We ground this proposition in the novelty-quality product formulation and evaluate it empirically across 15 benchmarks and 26 open-weight models, using n-gram absence from the pretraining data as a novelty proxy. Our results show that creativity benchmarks lie further in the tail regions than standard benchmarks. Moreover, on both creativity and standard benchmarks, model rankings from higher-tail subsets of each benchmark align more closely with human creativity judgments in LM-Arena. Building on these findings, we introduce q@Tail(α), a lower-cost creativity diagnostic that measures mean task quality on the tail fraction of an existing benchmark. Applying it to creativity-promoting methods reveals substantial room to improve LLM creativity through stronger tail performance.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 72 of its 111 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 9 Oct 2026.
Builds on
72 of 111 references.
References · 72
- 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,971
- 2021Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problemscited by 10,109
- 2019Sentence-BERT: Sentence Embeddings using Siamese BERT-Networkscited by 9,170
- 2021Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Codecited by 8,320
- 2019BERTScore: Evaluating Text Generation with BERTcited by 5,512
- 2021Measuring Mathematical Problem Solving With the MATH Datasetcited by 5,371
- 2018GLUE: A Multi-Task Benchmark and Analysis Platform for Natural Language Understandingcited by 4,899
- 2016SQuAD: 100,000+ Questions for Machine Comprehension of Textcited by 4,148
- 2023SWE-bench: Can Language Models Resolve Real-World GitHub Issues?cited by 3,373
- 2019The Curious Case of Neural Text Degenerationcited by 2,916
- 2019PIQA: Reasoning about Physical Commonsense in Natural Languagecited by 2,883
- 2023GPQA: A Graduate-Level Google-Proof Q&A Benchmarkcited by 2,879
38 more
- 2020Learning to summarize from human feedbackcited by 2,588
- 2020The Pile: An 800GB Dataset of Diverse Text for Language Modelingcited by 2,411
- 2023G-Eval: NLG Evaluation using GPT-4 with Better Human Alignmentcited by 2,276
- 2018CommonsenseQA: A Question Answering Challenge Targeting Commonsense Knowledgecited by 1,822
- 2025gpt-oss-120b & gpt-oss-20b Model Cardcited by 1,386
- 2024Chatbot Arena: An Open Platform for Evaluating LLMs by Human Preferencecited by 1,184
- 2022When Not to Trust Language Models: Investigating Effectiveness of Parametric and Non-Parametric Memoriescited by 1,128
- 2015A Diversity-Promoting Objective Function for Neural Conversation Modelscited by 1,077
- 2024From Crowdsourced Data to High-Quality Benchmarks: Arena-Hard and BenchBuilder Pipelinecited by 500
- 2022Large Language Models Struggle to Learn Long-Tail Knowledgecited by 458
- 2025Accelerating scientific discovery with Co-Scientistcited by 401
- 2022PlanBench: An Extensible Benchmark for Evaluating Large Language Models on Planning and Reasoning about Changecited by 382
- 2024Replacing Judges with Juries: Evaluating LLM Generations with a Panel of Diverse Modelscited by 326
- 2025MathArena: Evaluating LLMs on Uncontaminated Math Competitionscited by 297
- 2023Can Language Models Solve Graph Problems in Natural Language?cited by 252
- 2025Skywork-Reward-V2: Scaling Preference Data Curation via Human-AI Synergycited by 214
- 2022ROSCOE: A Suite of Metrics for Scoring Step-by-Step Reasoningcited by 177
- 2023Art or Artifice? Large Language Models and the False Promise of Creativitycited by 172
- 2024Infini-gram: Scaling Unbounded n-gram Language Models to a Trillion Tokenscited by 153
- 2024Turning Up the Heat: Min-p Sampling for Creative and Coherent LLM Outputscited by 150
- 2025RewardBench 2: Advancing Reward Model Evaluationcited by 150
- 2023ExpertPrompting: Instructing Large Language Models to be Distinguished Expertscited by 142
- 2020Evaluating the Evaluation of Diversity in Natural Language Generationcited by 129
- 2024Meta-Prompting: Enhancing Language Models with Task-Agnostic Scaffoldingcited by 117
- 2023Branch-Solve-Merge Improves Large Language Model Evaluation and Generationcited by 106
- 2025Nemotron 3 Nano: Open, Efficient Mixture-of-Experts Hybrid Mamba-Transformer Model for Agentic Reasoningcited by 104
- 2023A Confederacy of Models: a Comprehensive Evaluation of LLMs on Creative Writingcited by 99
- 2021The Perils of Using Mechanical Turk to Evaluate Open-Ended Text Generationcited by 97
- 2023ReCEval: Evaluating Reasoning Chains via Correctness and Informativenesscited by 77
- 2022Of Human Criteria and Automatic Metrics: A Benchmark of the Evaluation of Story Generationcited by 75
- 2024LLM Discussion: Enhancing the Creativity of Large Language Models via Discussion Framework and Role-Playcited by 66
- 2025NoveltyBench: Evaluating Language Models for Humanlike Diversitycited by 66
- 2021RiddleSense: Reasoning about Riddle Questions Featuring Linguistic Creativity and Commonsense Knowledgecited by 61
- 2025Base Models Beat Aligned Models at Randomness and Creativitycited by 51
- 2024AI as Humanity's Salieri: Quantifying Linguistic Creativity of Language Models via Systematic Attribution of Machine Text against Web Textcited by 42
- 2024Benchmarking Language Model Creativity: A Case Study on Code Generationcited by 40
- 2023Probing the Creativity of Large Language Models: Can models produce divergent semantic association?cited by 33
- 2025Roll the dice & look before you leap: Going beyond the creative limits of next-token predictioncited by 29
50 most cited of 72 All 72 (JSON)
Built on by
Not cited yet.