Efficient Evaluation of Large Language Models via Collaborative Filtering

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2504.08781v1
• Date: Sat, 05 Apr 2025 07:46:30 GMT
• Title: Efficient Evaluation of Large Language Models via Collaborative Filtering
• Authors: Xu-Xiang Zhong, Chao Yi, Han-Jia Ye,
• Abstract summary: Large Language Models (LLMs) have been proposed to measure and compare the capabilities of different LLMs.<n> evaluating LLMs is costly due to the large number of test instances and their slow inference speed.<n>We propose a two-stage method to efficiently estimate a model's real performance on a given benchmark.
• Score: 25.734508624520164
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: With the development of Large Language Models (LLMs), numerous benchmarks have been proposed to measure and compare the capabilities of different LLMs. However, evaluating LLMs is costly due to the large number of test instances and their slow inference speed. In this paper, we aim to explore how to efficiently estimate a model's real performance on a given benchmark based on its evaluation results on a small number of instances sampled from the benchmark. Inspired by Collaborative Filtering (CF) in Recommendation Systems (RS), we treat LLMs as users and test instances as items and propose a two-stage method. In the first stage, we treat instance selection as recommending products to users to choose instances that can easily distinguish model performance. In the second stage, we see performance prediction as rating prediction problem in RS to predict the target LLM's behavior on unselected instances. Experiments on multiple LLMs and datasets imply that our method can accurately estimate the target model's performance while largely reducing its inference overhead.

Related papers

• LLMs as Data Annotators: How Close Are We to Human Performance [47.61698665650761]
  Manual annotation of data is labor-intensive, time-consuming, and costly. In-context learning (ICL) in which some examples related to the task are given in the prompt can lead to inefficiencies and suboptimal model performance. This paper presents experiments comparing several LLMs, considering different embedding models, across various datasets for the Named Entity Recognition (NER) task.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-21T11:11:07Z)
• Efficient Model Selection for Time Series Forecasting via LLMs [52.31535714387368]
  We propose to leverage Large Language Models (LLMs) as a lightweight alternative for model selection.<n>Our method eliminates the need for explicit performance matrices by utilizing the inherent knowledge and reasoning capabilities of LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-02T20:33:27Z)
• 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)
• 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)
• 100 instances is all you need: predicting the success of a new LLM on unseen data by testing on a few instances [11.783547185760007]
  We use the evaluation results of previously tested LLMs to reduce the number of evaluations required to predict the performance of a new LLM. We conduct empirical studies on HELM-Lite and KindsOfReasoning, a collection of existing reasoning datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-05T14:19:45Z)
• In-Context Learning with Reinforcement Learning for Incomplete Utterance Rewriting [33.89176174108559]
  In-context learning of large language models (LLMs) makes predictions only based on instructions augmented with a few examples. Existing example selection methods for ICL utilize sparse or dense retrievers and derive effective performance. We propose our policy-based reinforcement learning framework for example selection (RLS), which consists of a language model (LM) selector and an LLM generator.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-23T12:32:12Z)
• SelectLLM: Query-Aware Efficient Selection Algorithm for Large Language Models [8.558834738072363]
  Large language models (LLMs) have been widely adopted due to their remarkable performance across various applications.<n>These individual LLMs show limitations in generalization and performance on complex tasks due to inherent training biases, model size constraints, and the quality or diversity of pre-training datasets.<n>We introduce SelectLLM, which efficiently directs input queries to the most suitable subset of LLMs from a large pool.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-16T06:11:21Z)
• Aligning Language Models with Demonstrated Feedback [58.834937450242975]
  Demonstration ITerated Task Optimization (DITTO) directly aligns language model outputs to a user's demonstrated behaviors. We evaluate DITTO's ability to learn fine-grained style and task alignment across domains such as news articles, emails, and blog posts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-02T23:13:56Z)
• 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)
• Regression-aware Inference with LLMs [52.764328080398805]
  We show that an inference strategy can be sub-optimal for common regression and scoring evaluation metrics. We propose alternate inference strategies that estimate the Bayes-optimal solution for regression and scoring metrics in closed-form from sampled responses.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-07T03:24:34Z)
• 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)
• MLLM-DataEngine: An Iterative Refinement Approach for MLLM [62.30753425449056]
  We propose a novel closed-loop system that bridges data generation, model training, and evaluation. Within each loop, the MLLM-DataEngine first analyze the weakness of the model based on the evaluation results. For targeting, we propose an Adaptive Bad-case Sampling module, which adjusts the ratio of different types of data. For quality, we resort to GPT-4 to generate high-quality data with each given data type.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-25T01:41:04Z)
• On Learning to Summarize with Large Language Models as References [101.79795027550959]
  Large language models (LLMs) are favored by human annotators over the original reference summaries in commonly used summarization datasets. We study an LLM-as-reference learning setting for smaller text summarization models to investigate whether their performance can be substantially improved.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-23T16:56:04Z)

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.