PredictaBoard: Benchmarking LLM Score Predictability
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2502.14445v1
- Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2025 10:52:38 GMT
- Title: PredictaBoard: Benchmarking LLM Score Predictability
- Authors: Lorenzo Pacchiardi, Konstantinos Voudouris, Ben Slater, Fernando Martínez-Plumed, José Hernández-Orallo, Lexin Zhou, Wout Schellaert,
- Abstract summary: Large Language Models (LLMs) often fail unpredictably.
This poses a significant challenge to ensuring their safe deployment.
We present PredictaBoard, a novel collaborative benchmarking framework.
- Score: 50.47497036981544
- License:
- Abstract: Despite possessing impressive skills, Large Language Models (LLMs) often fail unpredictably, demonstrating inconsistent success in even basic common sense reasoning tasks. This unpredictability poses a significant challenge to ensuring their safe deployment, as identifying and operating within a reliable "safe zone" is essential for mitigating risks. To address this, we present PredictaBoard, a novel collaborative benchmarking framework designed to evaluate the ability of score predictors (referred to as assessors) to anticipate LLM errors on specific task instances (i.e., prompts) from existing datasets. PredictaBoard evaluates pairs of LLMs and assessors by considering the rejection rate at different tolerance errors. As such, PredictaBoard stimulates research into developing better assessors and making LLMs more predictable, not only with a higher average performance. We conduct illustrative experiments using baseline assessors and state-of-the-art LLMs. PredictaBoard highlights the critical need to evaluate predictability alongside performance, paving the way for safer AI systems where errors are not only minimised but also anticipated and effectively mitigated. Code for our benchmark can be found at https://github.com/Kinds-of-Intelligence-CFI/PredictaBoard
Related papers
- 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) - Evaluating language models as risk scores [23.779329697527054]
We introduce folktexts, a software package to generate risk scores using question-answering LLMs.
We evaluate 17 recent LLMs across five proposed benchmark tasks.
We find that zero-shot risk scores produced by multiple-choice question-answering have high predictive signal but are widely miscalibrated.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-07-19T18:13:37Z) - Uncertainty is Fragile: Manipulating Uncertainty in Large Language Models [79.76293901420146]
Large Language Models (LLMs) are employed across various high-stakes domains, where the reliability of their outputs is crucial.
Our research investigates the fragility of uncertainty estimation and explores potential attacks.
We demonstrate that an attacker can embed a backdoor in LLMs, which, when activated by a specific trigger in the input, manipulates the model's uncertainty without affecting the final output.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-07-15T23:41:11Z) - Quantifying Prediction Consistency Under Model Multiplicity in Tabular LLMs [10.494477811252034]
Fine-tuning large language models can lead to textitfine-tuning multiplicity, where equally well-performing models make conflicting predictions on the same inputs.
This raises critical concerns about the robustness and reliability of Tabular LLMs.
This work proposes a novel metric to quantify the robustness of individual predictions without expensive model retraining.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-07-04T22:22:09Z) - SORRY-Bench: Systematically Evaluating Large Language Model Safety Refusal Behaviors [64.9938658716425]
Existing evaluations of large language models' (LLMs) ability to recognize and reject unsafe user requests face three limitations.
First, existing methods often use coarse-grained of unsafe topics, and are over-representing some fine-grained topics.
Second, linguistic characteristics and formatting of prompts are often overlooked, like different languages, dialects, and more -- which are only implicitly considered in many evaluations.
Third, existing evaluations rely on large LLMs for evaluation, which can be expensive.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-06-20T17:56:07Z) - Evaluating Uncertainty-based Failure Detection for Closed-Loop LLM Planners [10.746821861109176]
Large Language Models (LLMs) have witnessed remarkable performance as zero-shot task planners for robotic tasks.
However, the open-loop nature of previous works makes LLM-based planning error-prone and fragile.
In this work, we introduce a framework for closed-loop LLM-based planning called KnowLoop, backed by an uncertainty-based MLLMs failure detector.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-06-01T12:52:06Z) - Unveiling the Misuse Potential of Base Large Language Models via In-Context Learning [61.2224355547598]
Open-sourcing of large language models (LLMs) accelerates application development, innovation, and scientific progress.
Our investigation exposes a critical oversight in this belief.
By deploying carefully designed demonstrations, our research demonstrates that base LLMs could effectively interpret and execute malicious instructions.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-04-16T13:22:54Z) - TeLeS: Temporal Lexeme Similarity Score to Estimate Confidence in
End-to-End ASR [1.8477401359673709]
Class-probability-based confidence scores do not accurately represent quality of overconfident ASR predictions.
We propose a novel Temporal-Lexeme Similarity (TeLeS) confidence score to train Confidence Estimation Model (CEM)
We conduct experiments with ASR models trained in three languages, namely Hindi, Tamil, and Kannada, with varying training data sizes.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-01-06T16:29:13Z) - Token-Level Adversarial Prompt Detection Based on Perplexity Measures
and Contextual Information [67.78183175605761]
Large Language Models are susceptible to adversarial prompt attacks.
This vulnerability underscores a significant concern regarding the robustness and reliability of LLMs.
We introduce a novel approach to detecting adversarial prompts at a token level.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-11-20T03:17:21Z) - Revisiting Out-of-distribution Robustness in NLP: Benchmark, Analysis,
and LLMs Evaluations [111.88727295707454]
This paper reexamines the research on out-of-distribution (OOD) robustness in the field of NLP.
We propose a benchmark construction protocol that ensures clear differentiation and challenging distribution shifts.
We conduct experiments on pre-trained language models for analysis and evaluation of OOD robustness.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-06-07T17:47:03Z)
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.