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.
@inproceedings{DBLP:conf/icml/PoloWCSXY24,
author = {Felipe Maia Polo and
Lucas Weber and
Leshem Choshen and
Yuekai Sun and
Gongjun Xu and
Mikhail Yurochkin},
title = {tinyBenchmarks: evaluating LLMs with fewer examples},
booktitle = {Forty-first International Conference on Machine Learning, {ICML} 2024,
Vienna, Austria, July 21-27, 2024},
publisher = {OpenReview.net},
year = {2024},
url = {https://openreview.net/forum?id=qAml3FpfhG},
timestamp = {Mon, 02 Sep 2024 16:45:29 +0200},
biburl = {https://dblp.org/rec/conf/icml/PoloWCSXY24.bib},
bibsource = {dblp computer science bibliography, https://dblp.org}
}
See the full reference list in the paper.