Resolve failed Qwen3.5-9B judge evaluations before interpreting judge differences

Recover the failed Qwen3.5-9B candidate judgments and determine whether score differences between the GPT-4.1-mini and Qwen3.5-9B judges reflect judge behavior rather than execution failures.

Background

The benchmark uses GPT-4.1-mini as its primary judge and Qwen3.5-9B as a separately reported judge. The Qwen-side evaluation contains failures, including windows in which all candidate judgments fail for MDF and additional null judgments in the Qwen3.5 generation audit.

Because failed judgments affect the resulting match scores, the paper treats Qwen-judge results as provisional. Until the failed evaluations are recovered, observed differences between judges cannot be cleanly assigned to their judging behavior.

References

Until failed judgments are recovered, differences from the primary scores cannot be attributed to judge behavior alone.

— Can Large Language Models Forecast What Researchers Study Next?  (2609.00747 - Li et al., 1 Sep 2026) in Section 5.1, paragraph “Execution failures versus judge behavior”; Appendix, Section “Qwen3.5 Backbone: Selection and Verification”