The name is the button.

An agent writes the code now, and a human thumb hovers over Accept all a hundred times a day. The honest question of this decade is what, exactly, you just accepted. So I read the diff.

Eight years as a backend engineer in Stockholm, back in Tokyo since 2023, and I still ship something small most nights, usually badly. My one rule: the only real review of a model is the thing you built with it. That is why there is no leaderboard on this site.

Around a hundred and forty sources come through — the labs' own posts, the papers, the tools, the runtimes and languages nobody is watching yet, the chip under the demo, and the newsletters people actually forward. What is moving gets counted so the week reads at a glance, and every few days I explain one mechanism in plain words.

A story here is a headline, a short excerpt, one image and the link to whoever wrote it. We never reproduce the post; the images belong to their authors. A post written in Japanese appears in Japanese, exactly as it was published, and the link goes to the original.

— Yuki Halvorsen, Tokyo

← Accept All Archive

Amazon ScienceResearch

When LLM judges agree, should we believe them?

08.26

Imagine evaluating a retrieval-augmented-generation system. A user asks a question, the system retrieves a text passage, and an LLM judge decides whether it’s relevant.

Research

Read at Amazon Science ↗

One letter a week, starting soon.

Latest

When LLM judges agree, should we believe them?

Related

ResearchSOP-Bench: A new benchmark for evaluating AI agents on real business procedures Amazon Science

ResearchA decade of mathematical certainty: Reflections on the Automated Reasoning Group Amazon Science

ResearchA new benchmark for evaluating patient-facing health AI agents Amazon Science

ResearchCapturing token IDs during agentic interactions for better reinforcement learning Amazon Science

ToolsThe 7 best LLM evaluation tools in 2026 Pydantic

ResearchGranite 4.2 brings native reasoning to enterprise agents IBM Research