Related papers: Cheating Automatic LLM Benchmarks: Null Models Ach…

Building helpful and harmless large language models (LLMs) requires effective model alignment approach based on human instructions and feedback, which necessitates high-quality human-labeled data. Constructing such datasets is often…

Reward models are central to large language model (LLM) post-training. However, past work has shown that they can reward spurious or undesirable attributes such as length, format, hallucinations, and sycophancy. In this work, we introduce…

We present AutoBench, a fully automated and self-sustaining framework for evaluating Large Language Models (LLMs) through reciprocal peer assessment. This paper provides a rigorous scientific validation of the AutoBench methodology,…

Rapid advancements in large language models (LLMs) have the potential to assist in scientific progress. A critical capability toward this endeavor is the ability to reproduce existing work. To evaluate the ability of AI agents to reproduce…

The tendency to find and exploit "shortcuts" to complete tasks poses significant risks for reliable assessment and deployment of large language models (LLMs). For example, an LLM agent with access to unit tests may delete failing tests…

Recent advancements in Large Language Models (LLMs) have spurred interest in deploying LLM agents to undertake tasks in the world. LLMs are often deployed in agent systems: code that orchestrates LLM calls and provides them with tools. We…

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…

As Large Language Models (LLMs) evolve into autonomous agents, existing safety evaluations face a fundamental trade-off: manual benchmarks are costly, while LLM-based simulators are scalable but suffer from logic hallucination. We present…

As large language model (LLM) agents are deployed autonomously in diverse contexts, evaluating their capacity for strategic deception becomes crucial. While recent research has examined how AI systems scheme against human developers,…

Recent observations have underscored a disparity between the inflated benchmark scores and the actual performance of LLMs, raising concerns about potential contamination of evaluation benchmarks. This issue is especially critical for…

Automatic evaluation methods based on large language models (LLMs) are emerging as the standard tool for assessing the instruction-following abilities of LLM-based agents. The most common method in this paradigm, pairwise comparisons with a…

Advances in automated essay scoring (AES) have traditionally relied on labeled essays, requiring tremendous cost and expertise for their acquisition. Recently, large language models (LLMs) have achieved great success in various tasks, but…

Large Language Models (LLMs) have been observed to process non-human-readable text sequences, such as jailbreak prompts, often viewed as a bug for aligned LLMs. In this work, we present a systematic investigation challenging this…

Automatic evaluation is an integral aspect of dialogue system research. The traditional reference-based NLG metrics are generally found to be unsuitable for dialogue assessment. Consequently, recent studies have suggested various unique,…

Despite remarkable advancements in mitigating hallucinations in large language models (LLMs) by retrieval augmentation, it remains challenging to measure the reliability of LLMs using static question-answering (QA) data. Specifically, given…

Data contamination hinders fair LLM evaluation by introducing test data into newer models' training sets. Existing studies solve this challenge by updating benchmarks with newly collected data. However, they fail to guarantee…

A Large Language Model (LLM) as judge evaluates the quality of victim Machine Learning (ML) models, specifically LLMs, by analyzing their outputs. An LLM as judge is the combination of one model and one specifically engineered judge prompt…

New large language models (LLMs) are being released every day. Some perform significantly better or worse than expected given their parameter count. Therefore, there is a need for a method to independently evaluate models. The current best…

The pursuit of leaderboard rankings in Large Language Models (LLMs) has created a fundamental paradox: models excel at standardized tests while failing to demonstrate genuine language understanding and adaptability. Our systematic analysis…

Reward Models (RMs) are crucial to aligning large language models (LLMs), but the degree to which an RM specialized to one task (e.g. writing) generalizes to new tasks (e.g. math) is often not known a priori, often making using only one…