do-you-need-a-frontier-model-as-a-citation-verifier-benchmarking-rubric-llms-for-deep-research-source-attribution-de19d4b1·1 events·first seen Aliases: Do You Need a Frontier Model as a Citation Verifier? Benchmarking Rubric LLMs for Deep-Research Source Attribution
A new arXiv paper evaluates 8 LLM judges from 3 model families on citation quality assessment for deep-research systems, testing across 1,248 rubric decisions with human-reviewed gold labels. The study finds that cheaper models remain competitive with frontier models — GPT-5-mini achieves the strongest source-relevance F1 at 0.908 — but judges differ substantially in directional bias (pass-rate drift, false positive/negative rates) even when scalar F1 scores are similar. The key finding is that scalar F1 obscures biases that would be directly reinforced in an RL training loop, making judge calibration a prerequisite before using citation rubrics as reward signals.