Varco Arena: A Tournament Approach to Reference-Free Benchmarking Large Language Models

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2411.01281v3
• Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2025 01:34:31 GMT
• Title: Varco Arena: A Tournament Approach to Reference-Free Benchmarking Large Language Models
• Authors: Seonil Son, Ju-Min Oh, Heegon Jin, Cheolhun Jang, Jeongbeom Jeong, Kuntae Kim,
• Abstract summary: VARCO Arena is a novel, cost-effective, and robust benchmarking approach for large language models.<n>Our results demonstrate that VARCO Arena not only produces reliable LLM rankings but also provides a scalable, adaptable solution for qualitative evaluation.
• Score: 0.29687381456164
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
• Abstract: Most existing benchmarking approaches for evaluating the output quality of large language models (LLMs) rely on comparing LLM responses to predefined references. Such methods, based on static datasets, quickly become outdated as LLM capabilities and use cases evolve. In this work, we introduce VARCO Arena--a novel, cost-effective, and robust benchmarking approach that leverages a single-elimination tournament structure to minimize the number of required comparisons while eliminating the need for static references or costly human annotations. We validate our approach through two experiments: (i) a simulation study that examines its robustness under various conditions, and (ii) an empirical evaluation using publicly available benchmark prompts. In both experiments, VARCO Arena consistently outperforms current LLM benchmarking practices, achieving stronger correlations with human-established Elo ratings. Our results demonstrate that VARCO Arena not only produces reliable LLM rankings but also provides a scalable, adaptable solution for qualitative evaluation across diverse, customized use cases.

Related papers

• Efficient Evaluation of Large Language Models via Collaborative Filtering [25.734508624520164]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have been proposed to measure and compare the capabilities of different LLMs. evaluating LLMs is costly due to the large number of test instances and their slow inference speed. We propose a two-stage method to efficiently estimate a model's real performance on a given benchmark.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-05T07:46:30Z)
• Beyond the Singular: The Essential Role of Multiple Generations in Effective Benchmark Evaluation and Analysis [10.133537818749291]
  Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated significant utilities in real-world applications. Benchmark evaluations are crucial for assessing the capabilities of LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-13T03:43:33Z)
• HELMET: How to Evaluate Long-Context Language Models Effectively and Thoroughly [34.205934899868346]
  We present HELMET, a comprehensive benchmark encompassing seven diverse, application-centric categories. We find that synthetic tasks like NIAH are not good predictors of downstream performance. While most LCLMs achieve perfect NIAH scores, open-source models significantly lag behind closed ones when the task requires full-context reasoning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-03T17:20:11Z)
• Unleashing the Power of Large Language Models in Zero-shot Relation Extraction via Self-Prompting [21.04933334040135]
  We introduce the Self-Prompting framework, a novel method designed to fully harness the embedded RE knowledge within Large Language Models. Our framework employs a three-stage diversity approach to prompt LLMs, generating multiple synthetic samples that encapsulate specific relations from scratch. Experimental evaluations on benchmark datasets show our approach outperforms existing LLM-based zero-shot RE methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-02T01:12:54Z)
• MixEval: Deriving Wisdom of the Crowd from LLM Benchmark Mixtures [57.886592207948844]
  We propose MixEval, a new paradigm for establishing efficient, gold-standard evaluation by strategically mixing off-the-shelf benchmarks. It bridges (1) comprehensive and well-distributed real-world user queries and (2) efficient and fairly-graded ground-truth-based benchmarks, by matching queries mined from the web with similar queries from existing benchmarks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-03T05:47:05Z)
• Evaluating Generative Language Models in Information Extraction as Subjective Question Correction [49.729908337372436]
  We propose a new evaluation method, SQC-Score. Inspired by the principles in subjective question correction, we propose a new evaluation method, SQC-Score. Results on three information extraction tasks show that SQC-Score is more preferred by human annotators than the baseline metrics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-04T15:36:53Z)
• Benchmark Self-Evolving: A Multi-Agent Framework for Dynamic LLM Evaluation [51.99752147380505]
  This paper presents a benchmark self-evolving framework to dynamically evaluate Large Language Models (LLMs) We utilize a multi-agent system to manipulate the context or question of original instances, reframing new evolving instances with high confidence. Our framework widens performance discrepancies both between different models and within the same model across various tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-18T03:40:06Z)
• How to Prune Your Language Model: Recovering Accuracy on the "Sparsity May Cry'' Benchmark [60.72725673114168]
  We revisit the question of accurate BERT-pruning during fine-tuning on downstream datasets. We propose a set of general guidelines for successful pruning, even on the challenging SMC benchmark.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-21T03:11:30Z)
• 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)
• LlamaRec: Two-Stage Recommendation using Large Language Models for Ranking [10.671747198171136]
  We propose a two-stage framework using large language models for ranking-based recommendation (LlamaRec) In particular, we use small-scale sequential recommenders to retrieve candidates based on the user interaction history. LlamaRec consistently achieves datasets superior performance in both recommendation performance and efficiency.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-25T06:23:48Z)
• Evaluating Large Language Models at Evaluating Instruction Following [54.49567482594617]
  We introduce a challenging meta-evaluation benchmark, LLMBar, designed to test the ability of an LLM evaluator in discerning instruction-following outputs. We discover that different evaluators exhibit distinct performance on LLMBar and even the highest-scoring ones have substantial room for improvement.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-11T16:38:11Z)
• LLMRec: Benchmarking Large Language Models on Recommendation Task [54.48899723591296]
  The application of Large Language Models (LLMs) in the recommendation domain has not been thoroughly investigated. We benchmark several popular off-the-shelf LLMs on five recommendation tasks, including rating prediction, sequential recommendation, direct recommendation, explanation generation, and review summarization. The benchmark results indicate that LLMs displayed only moderate proficiency in accuracy-based tasks such as sequential and direct recommendation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-23T16:32:54Z)
• Efficient Benchmarking of Language Models [22.696230279151166]
  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.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-22T17:59:30Z)
• 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)
• Inference with Reference: Lossless Acceleration of Large Language Models [97.04200102556551]
  LLMA is an accelerator to speed up Large Language Model (LLM) inference with references. It is motivated by the observation that there are abundant identical text spans between the decoding result by an LLM and the reference that is available in many real world scenarios.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-10T09:55:14Z)

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.