norgitov/ trends
Technology · people · ideas
Back to discovery/Daily Papers1 hour ago

Judges Follow the Reference: The Derivation Gap in Verifying Tool-Call Arguments

Tool-call judges evaluate argument values proposed by LLM agents. We find that they accept a correct value less often when their input holds no reference for it, that is, no text that says what the value should be. This happens when the value is a default value from the function schema that the user did not mention, when it has to be inferred, or when the text it comes from was cut from the judge input. We call this drop in acceptance the derivation gap. It appears across all seven judges we evaluate, including System One models CLM and Jev. The gap is not only a truncation artifact: correct default values have the largest gap on a benchmark with no truncation. A controlled source-relocation test shows that judges follow the reference in their input: they favor a visible incorrect value over a correct value whose source is hidden. We introduce DeRef (Derived Reference): a separate model reads the full history without seeing the candidate and writes a reference for the judge. Across three benchmarks, DeRef improves overall argument AUROC for all judges tested. On the controlled test, it raises AUROC from chance or below to between 98.40 and 99.59.

Translation pending · showing the source description
Open original
SIGNAL FROM THE SOURCE
0
source votes
Tracking sinceOctober 14, 20260 source votes
Momentum—More observations needed
Discussion—Read comments ↗
PublishedOctober 13, 2026Linhai Ma, Yan Wang, Lingfei Qian
BEHIND THE NUMBERS

How interest changes

History starts here

The chart will appear after repeat observations. The current metric comes from the source.

0 source votes

Real observations only. History before source connection is not reconstructed.

A useful discovery?
KEEP EXPLORING

Connected ideas

Explore topic