Efficient Benchmarking of Language Models
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2308.11696v5
- Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2024 17:34:34 GMT
- Title: Efficient Benchmarking of Language Models
- Authors: Yotam Perlitz, Elron Bandel, Ariel Gera, Ofir Arviv, Liat Ein-Dor, Eyal Shnarch, Noam Slonim, Michal Shmueli-Scheuer, Leshem Choshen,
- Abstract summary: We present the problem of Efficient Benchmarking, namely, intelligently reducing the costs of LM evaluation without compromising reliability.
Using the HELM benchmark as a test case, we investigate how different benchmark design choices affect the computation-reliability trade-off.
We propose an evaluation algorithm, that, when applied to the HELM benchmark, leads to dramatic cost savings with minimal loss of benchmark reliability.
- Score: 22.696230279151166
- License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
- Abstract: The increasing versatility of language models (LMs) has given rise to a new class of benchmarks that comprehensively assess a broad range of capabilities. Such benchmarks are associated with massive computational costs, extending to thousands of GPU hours per model. However, the efficiency aspect of these evaluation efforts had raised little discussion in the literature. In this work, we present the problem of Efficient Benchmarking, namely, intelligently reducing the computation costs of LM evaluation without compromising reliability. Using the HELM benchmark as a test case, we investigate how different benchmark design choices affect the computation-reliability trade-off. We propose to evaluate the reliability of such decisions, by using a new measure -- Decision Impact on Reliability, DIoR for short. We find, for example, that a benchmark leader may change by merely removing a low-ranked model from the benchmark, and observe that a correct benchmark ranking can be obtained by considering only a fraction of the evaluation examples. Based on our findings, we outline a set of concrete recommendations for efficient benchmark design and utilization practices. To take a step further, we use our findings to propose an evaluation algorithm, that, when applied to the HELM benchmark, leads to dramatic cost savings with minimal loss of benchmark reliability, often reducing computation by x100 or more.
Related papers
- Active Evaluation Acquisition for Efficient LLM Benchmarking [18.85604491151409]
We investigate strategies to improve evaluation efficiency by selecting a subset of examples from each benchmark using a learned policy.
Our approach models the dependencies across test examples, allowing accurate prediction of the evaluation outcomes for the remaining examples.
Empirical results demonstrate that our approach significantly reduces the number of evaluation prompts required.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-10-08T12:08:46Z) - Inference-Time Decontamination: Reusing Leaked Benchmarks for Large Language Model Evaluation [61.350306618479365]
Leakage of benchmarks can prevent the accurate assessment of large language models' true performance.
We propose Inference-Time Decontamination (ITD) to address this issue.
ITD reduces inflated accuracy by 22.9% on GSM8K and 19.0% on MMLU.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-06-20T04:35:59Z) - The BiGGen Bench: A Principled Benchmark for Fine-grained Evaluation of Language Models with Language Models [94.31327813151208]
BiGGen Bench is a principled generation benchmark designed to thoroughly evaluate nine distinct capabilities of LMs across 77 diverse tasks.
A key feature of the BiGGen Bench is its use of instance-specific evaluation criteria, closely mirroring the nuanced discernment of human evaluation.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-06-09T12:30:30Z) - Don't Make Your LLM an Evaluation Benchmark Cheater [142.24553056600627]
Large language models(LLMs) have greatly advanced the frontiers of artificial intelligence, attaining remarkable improvement in model capacity.
To assess the model performance, a typical approach is to construct evaluation benchmarks for measuring the ability level of LLMs.
We discuss the potential risk and impact of inappropriately using evaluation benchmarks and misleadingly interpreting the evaluation results.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-11-03T14:59:54Z) - An energy-based comparative analysis of common approaches to text
classification in the Legal domain [0.856335408411906]
Large Language Models (LLMs) are extensively adopted to address NLP problems in academia and industry.
In this work, we present a detailed comparison of LLM and traditional approaches (e.g. SVM) on the LexGLUE benchmark.
The results indicate that very often, the simplest algorithms achieve performance very close to that of large LLMs.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-11-02T14:16:48Z) - From Static Benchmarks to Adaptive Testing: Psychometrics in AI Evaluation [60.14902811624433]
We discuss a paradigm shift from static evaluation methods to adaptive testing.
This involves estimating the characteristics and value of each test item in the benchmark and dynamically adjusting items in real-time.
We analyze the current approaches, advantages, and underlying reasons for adopting psychometrics in AI evaluation.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-06-18T09:54:33Z) - LLMs as Factual Reasoners: Insights from Existing Benchmarks and Beyond [135.8013388183257]
We propose a new protocol for inconsistency detection benchmark creation and implement it in a 10-domain benchmark called SummEdits.
Most LLMs struggle on SummEdits, with performance close to random chance.
The best-performing model, GPT-4, is still 8% below estimated human performance.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-05-23T21:50:06Z) - Deep Reinforcement Learning at the Edge of the Statistical Precipice [31.178451465925555]
We argue that reliable evaluation in the few run deep RL regime cannot ignore the uncertainty in results without running the risk of slowing down progress in the field.
We advocate for reporting interval estimates of aggregate performance and propose performance profiles to account for the variability in results.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-08-30T14:23:48Z) - The Benchmark Lottery [114.43978017484893]
"A benchmark lottery" describes the overall fragility of the machine learning benchmarking process.
We show that the relative performance of algorithms may be altered significantly simply by choosing different benchmark tasks.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-07-14T21:08:30Z)
This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.
This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.