Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Hauptverfasser: Dunlap, Lisa, Mandal, Krishna, Darrell, Trevor, Steinhardt, Jacob, Gonzalez, Joseph E
Format: Preprint
Veröffentlicht: 2024
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:https://arxiv.org/abs/2410.12851
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
_version_ 1866908327468859392
author Dunlap, Lisa
Mandal, Krishna
Darrell, Trevor
Steinhardt, Jacob
Gonzalez, Joseph E
author_facet Dunlap, Lisa
Mandal, Krishna
Darrell, Trevor
Steinhardt, Jacob
Gonzalez, Joseph E
contents Large language models (LLMs) often exhibit subtle yet distinctive characteristics in their outputs that users intuitively recognize, but struggle to quantify. These "vibes" -- such as tone, formatting, or writing style -- influence user preferences, yet traditional evaluations focus primarily on the singular axis of correctness. We introduce VibeCheck, a system for automatically comparing a pair of LLMs by discovering identifying traits of a model (vibes) that are well-defined, differentiating, and user-aligned. VibeCheck iteratively discovers vibes from model outputs and then utilizes a panel of LLM judges to quantitatively measure the utility of each vibe. We validate that the vibes generated by VibeCheck align with those found in human discovery and run VibeCheck on pairwise preference data from real-world user conversations with Llama-3-70b vs GPT-4. VibeCheck reveals that Llama has a friendly, funny, and somewhat controversial vibe. These vibes predict model identity with 80% accuracy and human preference with 61% accuracy. Lastly, we run VibeCheck on a variety of models and tasks including summarization, math, and captioning to provide insight into differences in model behavior. VibeCheck discovers vibes like Command X prefers to add concrete intros and conclusions when summarizing in comparison to TNGL, Llama-405b often overexplains its thought process on math problems compared to GPT-4o, and GPT-4 prefers to focus on the mood and emotions of the scene when captioning compared to Gemini-1.5-Flash. Code and vibe visualizer found at https://bench-mark.org/
format Preprint
id arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2410_12851
institution arXiv
publishDate 2024
record_format arxiv
spellingShingle VibeCheck: Discover and Quantify Qualitative Differences in Large Language Models
Dunlap, Lisa
Mandal, Krishna
Darrell, Trevor
Steinhardt, Jacob
Gonzalez, Joseph E
Computation and Language
Artificial Intelligence
Large language models (LLMs) often exhibit subtle yet distinctive characteristics in their outputs that users intuitively recognize, but struggle to quantify. These "vibes" -- such as tone, formatting, or writing style -- influence user preferences, yet traditional evaluations focus primarily on the singular axis of correctness. We introduce VibeCheck, a system for automatically comparing a pair of LLMs by discovering identifying traits of a model (vibes) that are well-defined, differentiating, and user-aligned. VibeCheck iteratively discovers vibes from model outputs and then utilizes a panel of LLM judges to quantitatively measure the utility of each vibe. We validate that the vibes generated by VibeCheck align with those found in human discovery and run VibeCheck on pairwise preference data from real-world user conversations with Llama-3-70b vs GPT-4. VibeCheck reveals that Llama has a friendly, funny, and somewhat controversial vibe. These vibes predict model identity with 80% accuracy and human preference with 61% accuracy. Lastly, we run VibeCheck on a variety of models and tasks including summarization, math, and captioning to provide insight into differences in model behavior. VibeCheck discovers vibes like Command X prefers to add concrete intros and conclusions when summarizing in comparison to TNGL, Llama-405b often overexplains its thought process on math problems compared to GPT-4o, and GPT-4 prefers to focus on the mood and emotions of the scene when captioning compared to Gemini-1.5-Flash. Code and vibe visualizer found at https://bench-mark.org/
title VibeCheck: Discover and Quantify Qualitative Differences in Large Language Models
topic Computation and Language
Artificial Intelligence
url https://arxiv.org/abs/2410.12851