LV-Eval: A Balanced Long-Context Benchmark with 5 Length Levels Up to 256K

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2402.05136v2
• Date: Thu, 03 Oct 2024 07:54:07 GMT
• Title: LV-Eval: A Balanced Long-Context Benchmark with 5 Length Levels Up to 256K
• Authors: Tao Yuan, Xuefei Ning, Dong Zhou, Zhijie Yang, Shiyao Li, Minghui Zhuang, Zheyue Tan, Zhuyu Yao, Dahua Lin, Boxun Li, Guohao Dai, Shengen Yan, Yu Wang,
• Abstract summary: This paper introduces LV-Eval, a challenging long-context benchmark with five length levels reaching up to 256k words. The advantages of LV-Eval include controllable evaluation across different context lengths, challenging test instances with confusing facts, and more objective evaluations.
• Score: 46.966627564849944
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: State-of-the-art large language models (LLMs) are now claiming remarkable supported context lengths of 256k or even more. In contrast, the average context lengths of mainstream benchmarks are insufficient (5k-21k), and they suffer from potential knowledge leakage and inaccurate metrics, resulting in biased evaluation. This paper introduces LV-Eval, a challenging long-context benchmark with five length levels (16k, 32k, 64k, 128k, and 256k) reaching up to 256k words. LV-Eval features two main tasks, single-hop QA and multi-hop QA, comprising 11 bilingual datasets. The design of LV-Eval has incorporated three key techniques, namely confusing facts insertion, keyword and phrase replacement, and keyword-recall-based metric design. The advantages of LV-Eval include controllable evaluation across different context lengths, challenging test instances with confusing facts, mitigated knowledge leakage, and more objective evaluations. We evaluate 15 LLMs on LV-Eval and conduct ablation studies on the benchmarking techniques. The results reveal that: (i) Moonshot-v1 and recent large-scale open-source models, such as Qwen-2.5-72B and Llama-3.1-70B, achieve the highest performance on LV-Eval, particularly at lengths below 64k. (ii) Models exhibit distinct score trends. For example, GLM-4-9B-128k, Yi-6B-200k, and Llama3-8B-1M exhibit a relatively gentle degradation of performance, but their absolute performances may not necessarily be higher than those of LLMs with shorter context lengths. (iii) LLMs' performances can significantly degrade in the presence of confusing information, especially in the pressure test of "needle in a haystack". (iv) Issues related to knowledge leakage and inaccurate metrics introduce bias in evaluation, and these concerns are alleviated in LV-Eval. All datasets and evaluation codes are released at: https://github.com/infinigence/LVEval.

Related papers

• Sequential-NIAH: A Needle-In-A-Haystack Benchmark for Extracting Sequential Needles from Long Contexts [23.076558892985986]
  We introduce Sequential-NIAH, a benchmark designed to evaluate the capability of large language models to extract sequential information from long contexts. The benchmark includes contexts ranging from 8K to 128K tokens in length, with a dataset of 14,000 samples (2,000 reserved for testing)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-07T03:50:12Z)
• NoLiMa: Long-Context Evaluation Beyond Literal Matching [100.00398424275501]
  NoLiMa is a benchmark extending the needle-in-a-haystack (NIAH) test. It requires models to infer latent associations to locate the needle within the haystack. We evaluate 12 popular large language models that claim to support contexts of at least 128K tokens.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-07T18:49:46Z)
• HumanEval-V: Evaluating Visual Understanding and Reasoning Abilities of Large Multimodal Models Through Coding Tasks [25.959032350818795]
  HumanEval-V is a benchmark designed to evaluate Large Language Models' visual understanding and reasoning capabilities through code generation. HumanEval-V includes 108 carefully crafted, entry-level Python coding tasks derived from platforms like CodeForces and Stack Overflow. We evaluate 19 state-of-the-art LMMs using HumanEval-V, uncovering significant challenges.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-16T09:04:57Z)
• MMIE: Massive Multimodal Interleaved Comprehension Benchmark for Large Vision-Language Models [71.36392373876505]
  We introduce MMIE, a large-scale benchmark for evaluating interleaved multimodal comprehension and generation in Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs) MMIE comprises 20K meticulously curated multimodal queries, spanning 3 categories, 12 fields, and 102 subfields, including mathematics, coding, physics, literature, health, and arts. It supports both interleaved inputs and outputs, offering a mix of multiple-choice and open-ended question formats to evaluate diverse competencies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-14T04:15:00Z)
• One Thousand and One Pairs: A "novel" challenge for long-context language models [56.60667988954638]
  NoCha is a dataset of 1,001 pairs of true and false claims about 67 fictional books. Our annotators confirm that the largest share of pairs in NoCha require global reasoning over the entire book to verify. On average, models perform much better on pairs that require only sentence-level retrieval vs. global reasoning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-24T02:03:57Z)
• Ada-LEval: Evaluating long-context LLMs with length-adaptable benchmarks [76.43527940649939]
  We introduce Ada-LEval, a benchmark for evaluating the long-context understanding of large language models (LLMs) Ada-LEval includes two challenging subsets, TSort and BestAnswer, which enable a more reliable evaluation of LLMs' long context capabilities. We evaluate 4 state-of-the-art closed-source API models and 6 open-source models with Ada-LEval.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-09T17:30:48Z)
• Are We on the Right Way for Evaluating Large Vision-Language Models? [92.5761176224556]
  Large vision-language models (LVLMs) have recently achieved rapid progress, sparking numerous studies to evaluate their multi-modal capabilities. We identify two primary issues: Visual content is unnecessary for many samples and intentional data leakage exists. We present MMStar, an elite vision-indispensable multi-modal benchmark comprising 1,500 samples meticulously selected by humans.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-29T17:59:34Z)
• Top Leaderboard Ranking = Top Coding Proficiency, Always? EvoEval: Evolving Coding Benchmarks via LLM [13.324171480106715]
  EvoEval is a program synthesis benchmark suite created by evolving existing benchmarks into different targeted domains. Our study shows that compared to the high performance obtained on standard benchmarks like HumanEval, there is a significant drop in performance. We showcase various insights, including the brittleness of instruction-following models when encountering rewording or subtle changes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-28T03:10:39Z)
• L-Eval: Instituting Standardized Evaluation for Long Context Language Models [91.05820785008527]
  We propose L-Eval to institute a more standardized evaluation for long context language models (LCLMs) We build a new evaluation suite containing 20 sub-tasks, 508 long documents, and over 2,000 human-labeled query-response pairs. Results show that popular n-gram matching metrics generally can not correlate well with human judgment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-20T17:59:41Z)

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.