Arjun Subramonian
Famous AuthorPublications
SCRuB: Social Concept Reasoning under Rubric-Based Evaluation
While many studies of Large Language Model (LLM) reasoning capabilities emphasize mathematical or technical tasks, few address reasoning about social concepts: the abstract ideas shaping social norms, culture, and institutions. This understudied capability is essential for modern models acting as social agents, yet no systematic evaluation methodology targets it. We introduce SCRuB (Social Concept Reasoning under Rubric-Based Evaluation), a framework designed for this setting of task indeterminacy. Our goal is to measure the degree to which a model reasons about social concepts with the depth and critical rigor of a human expert. SCRuB proceeds in three phases: prompt construction from established sources, response generation by experts and models, and comparative evaluation using a five-dimensional critical thinking rubric. To enable generalization of the pipeline, we introduce a Panel of Disciplinary Perspectives ensemble validated against independent expert judges. We release SCRuBEval (n=4,711 evaluation prompts) and SCRuBAnnotations (300 expert-authored responses and 150 expert comparative judgments from 45 PhD-level scholars). Our results show that frontier models consistently outperform human experts across all five rubric dimensions. Across 1,170 pairwise comparisons, expert judges ranked a model response first in 80.8% of judgments and preferred model responses overall 74.4% of the time. Ultimately, this study provides the first expert-grounded demonstration of evaluation saturation for social concept reasoning: the single-turn exam-style format has reached its ceiling for models and humans alike.
Centering Ecological Goals in Automated Identification of Individual Animals
Recognizing individual animals over time is central to many ecological and conservation questions, including estimating abundance, survival, movement, and social structure. Recent advances in automated identification from images and even acoustic data suggest that this process could be greatly accelerated, yet their promise has not translated well into ecological practice. We argue that the main barrier is not the performance of the automated methods themselves, but a mismatch between how those methods are typically developed and evaluated, and how ecological data is actually collected, processed, reviewed, and used. Future progress, therefore, will depend less on algorithmic gains alone than on recognizing that the usefulness of automated identification is grounded in ecological context: it depends on what question is being asked, what data are available, and what kinds of mistakes matter. Only by centering these questions can we move toward automated identification of individuals that is not only accurate but also ecologically useful, transparent, and trustworthy.
When AI Benchmarks Plateau: A Systematic Study of Benchmark Saturation
Artificial Intelligence (AI) benchmarks play a central role in measuring progress in model development and guiding deployment decisions. However, many benchmarks quickly become saturated, meaning that they can no longer differentiate between the best-performing models, diminishing their long-term value. In this study, we analyze benchmark saturation across 60 Large Language Model (LLM) benchmarks selected from technical reports by major model developers. To identify factors driving saturation, we characterize benchmarks along 14 properties spanning task design, data construction, and evaluation format. We test five hypotheses examining how each property contributes to saturation rates. Our analysis reveals that nearly half of the benchmarks exhibit saturation, with rates increasing as benchmarks age. Notably, hiding test data (i.e., public vs. private) shows no protective effect, while expert-curated benchmarks resist saturation better than crowdsourced ones. Our findings highlight which design choices extend benchmark longevity and inform strategies for more durable evaluation.