@inproceedings{gupta-etal-2026-litmus,
title = "Litmus: Zero-Label, Code-Driven Metric Specification for Evaluating {AI} Systems",
author = "Gupta, Prajjwal and
Gupta, Prasang and
Bhutani, Vishal and
Sharma, Apoorva and
Chundru, Sumanth and
Sarguroh, Waqar and
Paul, Kevin",
editor = "Atanasova, Pepa and
Haffari, Gholamreza and
Wang, Minghan",
booktitle = "Proceedings of the 2026 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing: Industry Track",
month = oct,
year = "2026",
address = "Budapest, Hungary",
publisher = "Association for Computational Linguistics",
url = "https://aclanthology.org/2026.emnlp-industry.194/",
pages = "3256--3280",
ISBN = "979-8-89176-460-6",
abstract = "As agentic LLM systems move from prototypes to deployment, evaluating them has become more important and more difficult. Evaluation goals are often left implicit. Without a clear account of what a system is expected to do, how it can fail, and which failures matter, metric choices become difficult to justify, interpret, or validate. We present Litmus, a zero-label system that designs evaluation and monitoring metrics for AI pipelines by eliciting evaluation intent from source code and targeted interrogation. Litmus first identifies what must be measured and why, then converts those answers into constraints for a justified, per-stage metric portfolio. We evaluate Litmus on three real, code-defined pipelines against AutoMetrics and three DynamicRubric baselines. Litmus achieves broader concern coverage on account grouping at matched size, spans more stages, produces a near-zero-redundancy portfolio, and, under a zero-label design-time constraint, ranks first in validity against per-row quality labels on all three pipelines, decisively on scientific QA ($\rho{=}0.72$ vs. 0.47 for the strongest baseline on the stitched single-vector score), with overlapping intervals on the other two. Results support a shift from automatic metric implementation to automatic metric specification: before asking which metric to compute, evaluation systems should ask what must be measured and why."
}<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<modsCollection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3">
<mods ID="gupta-etal-2026-litmus">
<titleInfo>
<title>Litmus: Zero-Label, Code-Driven Metric Specification for Evaluating AI Systems</title>
</titleInfo>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Prajjwal</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Gupta</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Prasang</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Gupta</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Vishal</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Bhutani</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Apoorva</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Sharma</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Sumanth</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Chundru</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Waqar</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Sarguroh</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Kevin</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Paul</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<originInfo>
<dateIssued>2026-10</dateIssued>
</originInfo>
<typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource>
<relatedItem type="host">
<titleInfo>
<title>Proceedings of the 2026 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing: Industry Track</title>
</titleInfo>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Pepa</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Atanasova</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Gholamreza</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Haffari</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Minghan</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Wang</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<originInfo>
<publisher>Association for Computational Linguistics</publisher>
<place>
<placeTerm type="text">Budapest, Hungary</placeTerm>
</place>
</originInfo>
<genre authority="marcgt">conference publication</genre>
<identifier type="isbn">979-8-89176-460-6</identifier>
</relatedItem>
<abstract>As agentic LLM systems move from prototypes to deployment, evaluating them has become more important and more difficult. Evaluation goals are often left implicit. Without a clear account of what a system is expected to do, how it can fail, and which failures matter, metric choices become difficult to justify, interpret, or validate. We present Litmus, a zero-label system that designs evaluation and monitoring metrics for AI pipelines by eliciting evaluation intent from source code and targeted interrogation. Litmus first identifies what must be measured and why, then converts those answers into constraints for a justified, per-stage metric portfolio. We evaluate Litmus on three real, code-defined pipelines against AutoMetrics and three DynamicRubric baselines. Litmus achieves broader concern coverage on account grouping at matched size, spans more stages, produces a near-zero-redundancy portfolio, and, under a zero-label design-time constraint, ranks first in validity against per-row quality labels on all three pipelines, decisively on scientific QA (ρ=0.72 vs. 0.47 for the strongest baseline on the stitched single-vector score), with overlapping intervals on the other two. Results support a shift from automatic metric implementation to automatic metric specification: before asking which metric to compute, evaluation systems should ask what must be measured and why.</abstract>
<identifier type="citekey">gupta-etal-2026-litmus</identifier>
<location>
<url>https://aclanthology.org/2026.emnlp-industry.194/</url>
</location>
<part>
<date>2026-10</date>
<extent unit="page">
<start>3256</start>
<end>3280</end>
</extent>
</part>
</mods>
</modsCollection>
%0 Conference Proceedings
%T Litmus: Zero-Label, Code-Driven Metric Specification for Evaluating AI Systems
%A Gupta, Prajjwal
%A Gupta, Prasang
%A Bhutani, Vishal
%A Sharma, Apoorva
%A Chundru, Sumanth
%A Sarguroh, Waqar
%A Paul, Kevin
%Y Atanasova, Pepa
%Y Haffari, Gholamreza
%Y Wang, Minghan
%S Proceedings of the 2026 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing: Industry Track
%D 2026
%8 October
%I Association for Computational Linguistics
%C Budapest, Hungary
%@ 979-8-89176-460-6
%F gupta-etal-2026-litmus
%X As agentic LLM systems move from prototypes to deployment, evaluating them has become more important and more difficult. Evaluation goals are often left implicit. Without a clear account of what a system is expected to do, how it can fail, and which failures matter, metric choices become difficult to justify, interpret, or validate. We present Litmus, a zero-label system that designs evaluation and monitoring metrics for AI pipelines by eliciting evaluation intent from source code and targeted interrogation. Litmus first identifies what must be measured and why, then converts those answers into constraints for a justified, per-stage metric portfolio. We evaluate Litmus on three real, code-defined pipelines against AutoMetrics and three DynamicRubric baselines. Litmus achieves broader concern coverage on account grouping at matched size, spans more stages, produces a near-zero-redundancy portfolio, and, under a zero-label design-time constraint, ranks first in validity against per-row quality labels on all three pipelines, decisively on scientific QA (ρ=0.72 vs. 0.47 for the strongest baseline on the stitched single-vector score), with overlapping intervals on the other two. Results support a shift from automatic metric implementation to automatic metric specification: before asking which metric to compute, evaluation systems should ask what must be measured and why.
%U https://aclanthology.org/2026.emnlp-industry.194/
%P 3256-3280
Markdown (Informal)
[Litmus: Zero-Label, Code-Driven Metric Specification for Evaluating AI Systems](https://aclanthology.org/2026.emnlp-industry.194/) (Gupta et al., EMNLP 2026)
ACL
- Prajjwal Gupta, Prasang Gupta, Vishal Bhutani, Apoorva Sharma, Sumanth Chundru, Waqar Sarguroh, and Kevin Paul. 2026. Litmus: Zero-Label, Code-Driven Metric Specification for Evaluating AI Systems. In Proceedings of the 2026 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing: Industry Track, pages 3256–3280, Budapest, Hungary. Association for Computational Linguistics.