Lessons from the Trenches on Reproducible Evaluation of Language Models

2405.14782

YC

42

Reddit

0

Published 5/30/2024 by Stella Biderman, Hailey Schoelkopf, Lintang Sutawika, Leo Gao, Jonathan Tow, Baber Abbasi, Alham Fikri Aji, Pawan Sasanka Ammanamanchi, Sidney Black, Jordan Clive and 20 others

💬

Abstract

Effective evaluation of language models remains an open challenge in NLP. Researchers and engineers face methodological issues such as the sensitivity of models to evaluation setup, difficulty of proper comparisons across methods, and the lack of reproducibility and transparency. In this paper we draw on three years of experience in evaluating large language models to provide guidance and lessons for researchers. First, we provide an overview of common challenges faced in language model evaluation. Second, we delineate best practices for addressing or lessening the impact of these challenges on research. Third, we present the Language Model Evaluation Harness (lm-eval): an open source library for independent, reproducible, and extensible evaluation of language models that seeks to address these issues. We describe the features of the library as well as case studies in which the library has been used to alleviate these methodological concerns.

Get summaries of the top AI research delivered straight to your inbox:

Overview

  • Evaluating large language models is an ongoing challenge in natural language processing (NLP)
  • Researchers and engineers face issues like the sensitivity of models to evaluation setup, difficulty comparing methods, and lack of reproducibility and transparency
  • This paper provides guidance and lessons based on 3 years of experience evaluating large language models

Plain English Explanation

Evaluating how well language models, such as those used in chat assistants and language generation, perform is an important but difficult problem in the field of NLP. Researchers and engineers who work on these models face several key challenges:

  1. The performance of the models can be very sensitive to the specific setup used for evaluation, making it hard to compare results across different studies.

  2. It's difficult to properly compare the effectiveness of different evaluation methods and determine which one is best.

  3. There are often issues with reproducibility, where it's hard for other researchers to replicate the exact same evaluation process and get the same results.

  4. The evaluation process often lacks transparency, making it unclear exactly how the models were tested and assessed.

The authors of this paper have 3 years of experience evaluating large language models, and they provide guidance on how to address these challenges. They explain best practices for designing and carrying out reliable, reproducible evaluations. They also introduce an open-source library called the Language Model Evaluation Harness, which aims to make language model evaluation more independent, reproducible, and extensible.

Technical Explanation

The paper first provides an overview of the common challenges faced in evaluating large language models. These include:

  • Sensitivity to Evaluation Setup: The performance of models can vary significantly depending on the specific details of the evaluation process, making it hard to compare results across studies.
  • Difficulty of Proper Comparisons: There is a lack of consensus on the best evaluation methods to use, and it's challenging to determine which approach is most appropriate.
  • Reproducibility and Transparency Issues: It is often difficult for other researchers to reproduce the exact same evaluation process and get the same results, and the evaluation procedures may not be fully transparent.

To address these issues, the authors outline a set of best practices for conducting language model evaluations:

  1. Carefully Design the Evaluation Process: Researchers should thoughtfully consider the choice of tasks, datasets, and metrics used to assess model performance.
  2. Ensure Reproducibility: Detailed documentation of the evaluation setup and procedures is crucial, as is making the code and data publicly available.
  3. Promote Transparency: Researchers should strive to clearly explain their evaluation methodology and rationale.

The paper then introduces the Language Model Evaluation Harness (lm-eval), an open-source library that aims to address the methodological concerns outlined earlier. The library provides a modular and extensible framework for independently and reproducibly evaluating language models. It includes a range of benchmark tasks and metrics, as well as utilities for managing experiments and reporting results.

The authors present several case studies demonstrating how the lm-eval library has been used to alleviate the methodological issues in language model evaluation, including [assessing the risk of low reproducibility and conducting multilingual evaluations.

Critical Analysis

The paper provides a thorough and well-reasoned discussion of the challenges in evaluating large language models, and the proposed best practices and the lm-eval library seem like a step in the right direction. However, some potential limitations and areas for further research are worth considering:

  1. The authors acknowledge that the lm-eval library is not a complete solution, and that there may still be issues with the choice of tasks and metrics included in the library. Continued research and community input will be necessary to refine and expand the library.

  2. The paper does not address the potential biases and ethical concerns that may arise from language model evaluations, such as the perpetuation of harmful stereotypes or the use of models for sensitive applications like content moderation. These are important considerations that should be explored in future work.

  3. While the case studies demonstrate the utility of the lm-eval library, more comprehensive evaluations across a wider range of language models and applications would be helpful to further validate the approach.

Overall, this paper makes a valuable contribution to the ongoing effort to improve the evaluation of large language models, and the lm-eval library appears to be a promising tool for enabling more reliable, reproducible, and transparent assessments.

Conclusion

This paper provides guidance and lessons learned from 3 years of experience in evaluating large language models, a critical but challenging task in the field of natural language processing. The authors outline common issues faced by researchers and engineers, such as the sensitivity of models to evaluation setup, difficulty of proper comparisons, and lack of reproducibility and transparency.

To address these challenges, the paper presents best practices for designing and carrying out language model evaluations, as well as the introduction of the open-source Language Model Evaluation Harness (lm-eval) library. This library aims to enable more independent, reproducible, and extensible evaluation of language models, helping to advance the state of the art in this important area of NLP research.

While the paper and the lm-eval library represent important steps forward, the authors acknowledge that continued work is needed to refine the evaluation process and address emerging concerns, such as the potential for biases and ethical issues. Nonetheless, this research provides valuable guidance and a solid foundation for improving the way we assess the capabilities and limitations of large language models.



This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!

Related Papers

💬

Risk or Chance? Large Language Models and Reproducibility in Human-Computer Interaction Research

Thomas Kosch, Sebastian Feger

YC

0

Reddit

0

Reproducibility is a major concern across scientific fields. Human-Computer Interaction (HCI), in particular, is subject to diverse reproducibility challenges due to the wide range of research methodologies employed. In this article, we explore how the increasing adoption of Large Language Models (LLMs) across all user experience (UX) design and research activities impacts reproducibility in HCI. In particular, we review upcoming reproducibility challenges through the lenses of analogies from past to future (mis)practices like p-hacking and prompt-hacking, general bias, support in data analysis, documentation and education requirements, and possible pressure on the community. We discuss the risks and chances for each of these lenses with the expectation that a more comprehensive discussion will help shape best practices and contribute to valid and reproducible practices around using LLMs in HCI research.

Read more

5/6/2024

FreeEval: A Modular Framework for Trustworthy and Efficient Evaluation of Large Language Models

FreeEval: A Modular Framework for Trustworthy and Efficient Evaluation of Large Language Models

Zhuohao Yu, Chang Gao, Wenjin Yao, Yidong Wang, Zhengran Zeng, Wei Ye, Jindong Wang, Yue Zhang, Shikun Zhang

YC

0

Reddit

0

The rapid development of large language model (LLM) evaluation methodologies and datasets has led to a profound challenge: integrating state-of-the-art evaluation techniques cost-effectively while ensuring reliability, reproducibility, and efficiency. Currently, there is a notable absence of a unified and adaptable framework that seamlessly integrates various evaluation approaches. Moreover, the reliability of evaluation findings is often questionable due to potential data contamination, with the evaluation efficiency commonly overlooked when facing the substantial costs associated with LLM inference. In response to these challenges, we introduce FreeEval, a modular and scalable framework crafted to enable trustworthy and efficient automatic evaluations of LLMs. Firstly, FreeEval's unified abstractions simplify the integration and improve the transparency of diverse evaluation methodologies, encompassing dynamic evaluation that demand sophisticated LLM interactions. Secondly, the framework integrates meta-evaluation techniques like human evaluation and data contamination detection, which, along with dynamic evaluation modules in the platform, enhance the fairness of the evaluation outcomes. Lastly, FreeEval is designed with a high-performance infrastructure, including distributed computation and caching strategies, enabling extensive evaluations across multi-node, multi-GPU clusters for open-source and proprietary LLMs.

Read more

4/10/2024

📉

Exploring Precision and Recall to assess the quality and diversity of LLMs

Florian Le Bronnec, Alexandre Verine, Benjamin Negrevergne, Yann Chevaleyre, Alexandre Allauzen

YC

0

Reddit

0

We introduce a novel evaluation framework for Large Language Models (LLMs) such as textsc{Llama-2} and textsc{Mistral}, focusing on importing Precision and Recall metrics from image generation to text generation. This approach allows for a nuanced assessment of the quality and diversity of generated text without the need for aligned corpora. By conducting a comprehensive evaluation of state-of-the-art language models, the study reveals new insights into their performance on open-ended generation tasks, which are not adequately captured by traditional benchmarks. The findings highlight a trade-off between the quality and diversity of generated samples, particularly when models are fine-tuned on instruction dataset or with human feedback. This work extends the toolkit for distribution-based NLP evaluation, offering insights into the practical capabilities and challenges that current LLMs face in generating diverse and high-quality text. We release our code and data.

Read more

6/5/2024

Leveraging Large Language Models for NLG Evaluation: Advances and Challenges

New!Leveraging Large Language Models for NLG Evaluation: Advances and Challenges

Zhen Li, Xiaohan Xu, Tao Shen, Can Xu, Jia-Chen Gu, Yuxuan Lai, Chongyang Tao, Shuai Ma

YC

0

Reddit

0

In the rapidly evolving domain of Natural Language Generation (NLG) evaluation, introducing Large Language Models (LLMs) has opened new avenues for assessing generated content quality, e.g., coherence, creativity, and context relevance. This paper aims to provide a thorough overview of leveraging LLMs for NLG evaluation, a burgeoning area that lacks a systematic analysis. We propose a coherent taxonomy for organizing existing LLM-based evaluation metrics, offering a structured framework to understand and compare these methods. Our detailed exploration includes critically assessing various LLM-based methodologies, as well as comparing their strengths and limitations in evaluating NLG outputs. By discussing unresolved challenges, including bias, robustness, domain-specificity, and unified evaluation, this paper seeks to offer insights to researchers and advocate for fairer and more advanced NLG evaluation techniques.

Read more

6/13/2024