tinyBenchmarks: evaluating LLMs with fewer examples

Fuente: arXiv
Guardado en:
Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Polo, Felipe Maia, Weber, Lucas, Choshen, Leshem, Sun, Yuekai, Xu, Gongjun, Yurochkin, Mikhail
Formato: Preprint
Publicado: 2024
Materias:
Acceso en línea:
Etiquetas: Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
_version_ 1866910459563606016
author Polo, Felipe Maia
Weber, Lucas
Choshen, Leshem
Sun, Yuekai
Xu, Gongjun
Yurochkin, Mikhail
author_facet Polo, Felipe Maia
Weber, Lucas
Choshen, Leshem
Sun, Yuekai
Xu, Gongjun
Yurochkin, Mikhail
contents The versatility of large language models (LLMs) led to the creation of diverse benchmarks that thoroughly test a variety of language models' abilities. These benchmarks consist of tens of thousands of examples making evaluation of LLMs very expensive. In this paper, we investigate strategies to reduce the number of evaluations needed to assess the performance of an LLM on several key benchmarks. For example, we show that to accurately estimate the performance of an LLM on MMLU, a popular multiple-choice QA benchmark consisting of 14K examples, it is sufficient to evaluate this LLM on 100 curated examples. We release evaluation tools and tiny versions of popular benchmarks: Open LLM Leaderboard, MMLU, HELM, and AlpacaEval 2.0. Our empirical analysis demonstrates that these tools and tiny benchmarks are sufficient to reliably and efficiently reproduce the original evaluation results.
format Preprint
id arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2402_14992
institution arXiv
publishDate 2024
record_format arxiv
spellingShingle tinyBenchmarks: evaluating LLMs with fewer examples
Polo, Felipe Maia
Weber, Lucas
Choshen, Leshem
Sun, Yuekai
Xu, Gongjun
Yurochkin, Mikhail
Computation and Language
Artificial Intelligence
Machine Learning
The versatility of large language models (LLMs) led to the creation of diverse benchmarks that thoroughly test a variety of language models' abilities. These benchmarks consist of tens of thousands of examples making evaluation of LLMs very expensive. In this paper, we investigate strategies to reduce the number of evaluations needed to assess the performance of an LLM on several key benchmarks. For example, we show that to accurately estimate the performance of an LLM on MMLU, a popular multiple-choice QA benchmark consisting of 14K examples, it is sufficient to evaluate this LLM on 100 curated examples. We release evaluation tools and tiny versions of popular benchmarks: Open LLM Leaderboard, MMLU, HELM, and AlpacaEval 2.0. Our empirical analysis demonstrates that these tools and tiny benchmarks are sufficient to reliably and efficiently reproduce the original evaluation results.
title tinyBenchmarks: evaluating LLMs with fewer examples
topic Computation and Language
Artificial Intelligence
Machine Learning
url https://arxiv.org/abs/2402.14992