On Speeding Up Language Model Evaluation

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2407.06172v3
• Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2025 21:53:59 GMT
• Title: On Speeding Up Language Model Evaluation
• Authors: Jin Peng Zhou, Christian K. Belardi, Ruihan Wu, Travis Zhang, Carla P. Gomes, Wen Sun, Kilian Q. Weinberger,
• Abstract summary: We propose an $textitadaptive$ approach to explore this space.<n>We lean on multi-armed bandits to sequentially identify the next (method, validation sample)-pair to evaluate.<n>We show that it can identify the top-performing method using only 5-15% of the typical resources.
• Score: 48.51924035873411
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Developing prompt-based methods with Large Language Models (LLMs) requires making numerous decisions, which give rise to a combinatorial search problem over hyper-parameters. This exhaustive evaluation can be time-consuming and costly. In this paper, we propose an $\textit{adaptive}$ approach to explore this space. We are exploiting the fact that often only few samples are needed to identify clearly superior or inferior settings, and that many evaluation tests are highly correlated. We lean on multi-armed bandits to sequentially identify the next (method, validation sample)-pair to evaluate and utilize low-rank matrix factorization to fill in missing evaluations. We carefully assess the efficacy of our approach on several competitive benchmark problems and show that it can identify the top-performing method using only 5-15% of the typical resources -- resulting in 85-95% LLM cost savings. Our code is available at https://github.com/kilian-group/banditeval.

Related papers

• Reliable and Efficient Amortized Model-based Evaluation [57.6469531082784]
  The average score across a wide range of benchmarks provides a signal that helps guide the use of language models in practice. A popular attempt to lower the cost is to compute the average score on a subset of the benchmark. This approach often renders an unreliable measure of LM performance because the average score is often confounded with the difficulty of the questions in the benchmark subset. We train a model that predicts question difficulty from its content, enabling a reliable measurement at a fraction of the cost.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-17T16:15:02Z)
• Self-Training Elicits Concise Reasoning in Large Language Models [23.475414693530965]
  Chain-of-thought (CoT) reasoning has enabled large language models (LLMs) to utilize additional computation through intermediate tokens. We propose simple fine-tuning methods which leverage self-generated concise reasoning paths. Our method achieves a 30% reduction in output tokens, across five model families on GSM8K and MATH, while maintaining average accuracy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-27T14:14:50Z)
• Words Matter: Leveraging Individual Text Embeddings for Code Generation in CLIP Test-Time Adaptation [21.20806568508201]
  We show how to leverage class text information to mitigate distribution drifts encountered by vision-language models (VLMs) during test-time inference. We propose to generate pseudo-labels for the test-time samples by exploiting generic class text embeddings as fixed centroids of a label assignment problem. Experiments on multiple popular test-time adaptation benchmarks presenting diverse complexity empirically show the superiority of CLIP-OT.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-26T00:15:37Z)
• Self-Calibrated Listwise Reranking with Large Language Models [137.6557607279876]
  Large language models (LLMs) have been employed in reranking tasks through a sequence-to-sequence approach. This reranking paradigm requires a sliding window strategy to iteratively handle larger candidate sets. We propose a novel self-calibrated listwise reranking method, which aims to leverage LLMs to produce global relevance scores for ranking.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-07T10:31:31Z)
• 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)
• AIME: AI System Optimization via Multiple LLM Evaluators [79.03422337674664]
  AIME is an evaluation protocol that utilizes multiple LLMs that each independently generate an evaluation on separate criteria and then combine them via concatenation. We show AIME outperforming baseline methods in code generation tasks, with up to $62%$ higher error detection rate and up to $16%$ higher success rate than a single LLM evaluation protocol on LeetCodeHard and HumanEval datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-04T04:03:24Z)
• Step-by-Step Reasoning for Math Problems via Twisted Sequential Monte Carlo [55.452453947359736]
  We introduce a novel verification method based on Twisted Sequential Monte Carlo (TSMC) We apply TSMC to Large Language Models by estimating the expected future rewards at partial solutions. This approach results in a more straightforward training target that eliminates the need for step-wise human annotations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-02T18:17:54Z)
• Leveraging LLMs for Dialogue Quality Measurement [27.046917937460798]
  Large language models (LLMs) show robust zeroshot and few-shot capabilities across NLP tasks. Manipulating factors such as model size, in-context examples, and selection techniques, we examine "chain-of-thought" (CoT) reasoning and label extraction procedures. Our results indicate that LLMs that are suitably fine-tuned and have sufficient reasoning capabilities can be leveraged for automated dialogue evaluation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-25T06:19:47Z)
• Benchmarking Uncertainty Quantification Methods for Large Language Models with LM-Polygraph [83.90988015005934]
  Uncertainty quantification is a key element of machine learning applications. We introduce a novel benchmark that implements a collection of state-of-the-art UQ baselines. We conduct a large-scale empirical investigation of UQ and normalization techniques across eleven tasks, identifying the most effective approaches.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-21T20:06:31Z)
• Prompt Optimization with EASE? Efficient Ordering-aware Automated Selection of Exemplars [66.823588073584]
  Large language models (LLMs) have shown impressive capabilities in real-world applications. The quality of these exemplars in the prompt greatly impacts performance. Existing methods fail to adequately account for the impact of exemplar ordering on the performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-25T08:23:05Z)
• Self-Evaluation Improves Selective Generation in Large Language Models [54.003992911447696]
  We reformulate open-ended generation tasks into token-level prediction tasks. We instruct an LLM to self-evaluate its answers. We benchmark a range of scoring methods based on self-evaluation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-14T19:09:22Z)
• Investigating Data Contamination in Modern Benchmarks for Large Language Models [27.479260572913724]
  Recent observations have underscored a disparity between the inflated benchmark scores and the actual performance of LLMs. We study data contamination by proposing two methods tailored for both open-source and proprietary LLMs. We find that certain commercial LLMs could surprisingly guess the missing option in various test sets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-16T11:03:04Z)
• Self-Evaluation Guided Beam Search for Reasoning [61.523627290397556]
  We introduce a stepwise self-evaluation mechanism to guide and calibrate the reasoning process of Large Language Model (LLM) We propose a decoding algorithm integrating the self-evaluation guidance via beam search. Our approach surpasses the corresponding Codex-backboned baselines in few-shot accuracy by $6.34%$, $9.56%$, and $5.46%$ on the GSM8K, AQuA, and StrategyQA.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-01T02:37:59Z)
• Batch Active Learning at Scale [39.26441165274027]
  Batch active learning, which adaptively issues batched queries to a labeling oracle, is a common approach for addressing this problem. In this work, we analyze an efficient active learning algorithm, which focuses on the large batch setting. We show that our sampling method, which combines notions of uncertainty and diversity, easily scales to batch sizes (100K-1M) several orders of magnitude larger than used in previous studies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-07-29T18:14:05Z)

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.