The Benchmark Ceiling: Human Judgment, Evaluation Scarcity, and the Political Economy of AI Capability Measurement
Benchmarks are the primary instruments through which AI capability is measured, compared, and governed. This paper argues that the validity of frontier AI benchmarks is a function of the quality of human judgment embedded in their construction, and that this quality is structurally scarce in ways that standard scaling narratives obscure. As foundation models approach ceiling performance on existing evaluation suites, discriminating signal concentrates in the hardest benchmark items, precisely th
Record details
Published: 4 June 2026
Source: arXiv
Category: Research
Topics: Bias & fairness · Jobs & economy
Retrieved: 14 July 2026
Related evidence
These records share source-supplied organisations, an exact publisher byline, automatic topics or regions. The reason is shown on every link; related does not mean supporting, agreeing with or verifying this record.
The Benchmark Ceiling: Human Judgment, Evaluation Scarcity, and the Political Economy of AI Capability Measurement
arXiv cs.CY · 14 July 2026
Impacts of Histories and Models on LLM Grading: A Study in Advanced Software Engineering Courses
arXiv · 7 June 2026
Beyond the Algorithm: Professional Experiences and Perceptions of AI Bias
arXiv · 13 June 2026
What Medicine Taught Us About Fairness and What It Missed: Lessons from Reconsidering Race-Specific Lung Function Reference Algorithms
arXiv · 22 May 2026
What is ethical: AIHED driving humans or Human-Driven AIHED? A conceptual framework enabling the ‘ethos’ of AI-driven higher education
OpenAlex · 19 May 2026
Causal Fairness for Survival Analysis
arXiv · 12 May 2026
How to cite this record
ethics.ai (4 June 2026), “The Benchmark Ceiling: Human Judgment, Evaluation Scarcity, and the Political Economy of AI Capability Measurement,” evidence record 1455, https://ethics.ai/record/1455 (originally published by arXiv).
Use and limitations
This page is a stable index and citation surface for a source record. ethics.ai did not author the underlying report and has not independently verified every claim. Automatic topics may be imperfect. For consequential use, quote and cite the original publisher.