Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

ILDAE: Instance-Level Difficulty Analysis of Evaluation Data

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2203.03073 v2 pith:GUY4XHJ4 submitted 2022-03-07 cs.CL cs.AIcs.LG

classification cs.CLcs.AIcs.LG
keywords difficultyevaluationdataildaeinstancesquestionsanalysisapplications
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

Knowledge of questions' difficulty level helps a teacher in several ways, such as estimating students' potential quickly by asking carefully selected questions and improving quality of examination by modifying trivial and hard questions. Can we extract such benefits of instance difficulty in NLP? To this end, we conduct Instance-Level Difficulty Analysis of Evaluation data (ILDAE) in a large-scale setup of 23 datasets and demonstrate its five novel applications: 1) conducting efficient-yet-accurate evaluations with fewer instances saving computational cost and time, 2) improving quality of existing evaluation datasets by repairing erroneous and trivial instances, 3) selecting the best model based on application requirements, 4) analyzing dataset characteristics for guiding future data creation, 5) estimating Out-of-Domain performance reliably. Comprehensive experiments for these applications result in several interesting findings, such as evaluation using just 5% instances (selected via ILDAE) achieves as high as 0.93 Kendall correlation with evaluation using complete dataset and computing weighted accuracy using difficulty scores leads to 5.2% higher correlation with Out-of-Domain performance. We release the difficulty scores and hope our analyses and findings will bring more attention to this important yet understudied field of leveraging instance difficulty in evaluations.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. AGI-Elo: How Far Are We From Mastering A Task?

    cs.AI 2025-05 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    AGI-Elo applies Elo/Glicko-style ratings to model-versus-test-case matches, producing joint difficulty and competency scores and competency-gap estimates across six AI benchmarks.

Pith tools