Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

GameEval: Evaluating LLMs on Conversational Games

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2308.10032 v1 pith:YDWFOC5S submitted 2023-08-19 cs.CL

GameEval: Evaluating LLMs on Conversational Games

classification cs.CL
keywords gameevalllmsevaluatinggamesmodelsconversationalevaluationmethods
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

The rapid advancements in large language models (LLMs) have presented challenges in evaluating those models. Existing evaluation methods are either reference-based or preference based, which inevitably need human intervention or introduce test bias caused by evaluator models. In this paper, we propose GameEval, a novel approach to evaluating LLMs through goal-driven conversational games, overcoming the limitations of previous methods. GameEval treats LLMs as game players and assigns them distinct roles with specific goals achieved by launching conversations of various forms, including discussion, question answering, and voting. We design three unique games with cooperative or adversarial objectives, accompanied by corresponding evaluation metrics, to show how this new paradigm comprehensively evaluates model performance.Through extensive experiments, we show that GameEval can effectively differentiate the capabilities of various LLMs, providing a comprehensive assessment of their integrated abilities to solve complex problems. Our public anonymous code is available at https://github.com/GameEval/GameEval.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Common-agency Games for Multi-Objective Test-Time Alignment

    cs.GT 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    CAGE uses common-agency games and an EPEC algorithm to compute equilibrium policies that balance multiple conflicting objectives for test-time LLM alignment.

  2. Multi-Turn Multi-Agent Dialogue for Collaborative Reconstruction Improves VLM Performance on Spatial Reasoning, But Only Barely

    cs.CL 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 4.0

    Multi-turn multi-agent dialogue improves VLM spatial reasoning in collaborative reconstruction only marginally, with text descriptions outperforming visual inputs.