Abstract
Creativity benchmarks for large language models (LLMs) vary widely in task and metric design. This raises the question of whether they capture a common notion of creativity. We propose that this shared target can be formalized as task-specific performance in the long tail of a reference input-output distribution, which describes how common input-output pairs are relative to a chosen source of text. We ground this proposition in the novelty-quality product formulation and evaluate it empirically across 15 benchmarks and 26 open-weight models, using n-gram absence from the pretraining data as a novelty proxy. Our results show that creativity benchmarks lie further in the tail regions than standard benchmarks. Moreover, on both creativity and standard benchmarks, model rankings from higher-tail subsets of each benchmark align more closely with human creativity judgments in LM-Arena. Building on these findings, we introduce q@Tail(α), a lower-cost creativity diagnostic that measures mean task quality on the tail fraction of an existing benchmark. Applying it to creativity-promoting methods reveals substantial room to improve LLM creativity through stronger tail performance.
Community
Hi everyone! I’m one of the authors of this paper.
We investigate whether various LLM creativity benchmarks capture a shared target: performance in the long tail of a reference input-output distribution.
Across 15 benchmarks and 26 open-weight models, we find that creativity benchmarks lie further in the long tail of the reference input–output distribution than standard benchmarks. Moreover, model rankings on higher-tail subsets align more closely with human creativity judgments in LM-Arena, even when those subsets come from standard benchmarks.
Based on this finding, we introduce q@Tail(α), a lightweight creativity diagnostic that measures task quality on the tail fraction of an existing benchmark. This offers a practical way to study creativity using benchmarks you already have.
Code and data: https://github.com/YichenZW/longtail-creativity
We also share a taxonomy of LLM creativity evaluation and a curated reading list: https://github.com/YichenZW/awesome_llm_creativity.
Contributions and suggestions are welcome!
This is an automated message from the Librarian Bot. I found the following papers similar to this paper.
The following papers were recommended by the Semantic Scholar API
- CLIN: an Objective Framework for Evaluating Creativity in Short Persian Literary Text (2026)
- Improving Diversity in LLM Short Story Generation (2026)
- Are LLMs becoming similarly creative? Evidence from three years of models (2026)
- The Limits of Automatic Evaluation of Creativity in Large Language Models (2026)
- Ideation Arena: Evaluating LLM Generated Research Ideas with Battle-style Human Expert Assessment (2026)
- Creative Generation via Multi-Agent Debate: Does Debate Suppress Diversity? (2026)
- Old Ideas, Novel Problems: The Instability of LLM-Based Novelty Evaluation (2026)
Please give a thumbs up to this comment if you found it helpful!
If you want recommendations for any Paper on Hugging Face checkout this Space
You can directly ask Librarian Bot for paper recommendations by tagging it in a comment: @librarian-bot recommend
Get this paper in your agent:
hf papers read 2610.12998 Don't have the latest CLI?
curl -LsSf https://hf.co/cli/install.sh | bash Models citing this paper 0
No model linking this paper
Datasets citing this paper 0
No dataset linking this paper
Spaces citing this paper 0
No Space linking this paper
Collections including this paper 0
No Collection including this paper