REVIEW 7 cited by
Stop Uploading Test Data in Plain Text: Practical Strategies for Mitigating Data Contamination by Evaluation Benchmarks
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
Stop Uploading Test Data in Plain Text: Practical Strategies for Mitigating Data Contamination by Evaluation Benchmarks
read the original abstract
Data contamination has become prevalent and challenging with the rise of models pretrained on large automatically-crawled corpora. For closed models, the training data becomes a trade secret, and even for open models, it is not trivial to detect contamination. Strategies such as leaderboards with hidden answers, or using test data which is guaranteed to be unseen, are expensive and become fragile with time. Assuming that all relevant actors value clean test data and will cooperate to mitigate data contamination, what can be done? We propose three strategies that can make a difference: (1) Test data made public should be encrypted with a public key and licensed to disallow derivative distribution; (2) demand training exclusion controls from closed API holders, and protect your test data by refusing to evaluate without them; (3) avoid data which appears with its solution on the internet, and release the web-page context of internet-derived data along with the data. These strategies are practical and can be effective in preventing data contamination.
Forward citations
Cited by 7 Pith papers
-
Do Androids Dream of Breaking the Game? Systematically Auditing AI Agent Benchmarks with BenchJack
BenchJack audits 10 AI agent benchmarks, synthesizes exploits achieving near-perfect scores without task completion, surfaces 219 flaws, and reduces hackable-task ratios to under 10% on four benchmarks via iterative patching.
-
Pretraining Data Exposure in Large Language Models: A Survey of Membership Inference, Data Contamination, and Security Implications
First unified survey formalizing Pretraining Data Exposure across exposure levels and reviewing attack, defense, and contamination methods for LLMs.
-
How Well Does GPT-4o Understand Vision? Evaluating Multimodal Foundation Models on Standard Computer Vision Tasks
Multimodal foundation models achieve respectable but sub-specialist performance on semantic vision tasks and weaker results on geometric tasks when evaluated through prompt chaining on established benchmarks.
-
Smaug: Fixing Failure Modes of Preference Optimisation with DPO-Positive
DPOP is a new loss function that prevents DPO from lowering preferred response likelihoods and outperforms standard DPO on diverse datasets, MT-Bench, and enables Smaug-72B to exceed 80% on the Open LLM Leaderboard.
-
Measuring Progress Toward AGI: A Cognitive Framework
The paper introduces a 10-faculty Cognitive Taxonomy and a held-out task protocol to generate cognitive profiles for measuring AI progress toward AGI.
-
Reward Modeling for Reinforcement Learning-Based LLM Reasoning: Design, Challenges, and Evaluation
A taxonomy-driven survey arguing that reward design is the central mechanism shaping reliable LLM reasoning, with maps of reward paradigms, reward-hacking failure modes, and benchmark pitfalls.
-
When Generic Prompt Improvements Hurt: Evaluation-Driven Iteration for LLM Applications
Adding generic prompt rules to task-specific LLM prompts is not monotonic: in 15-20 case local suites, Llama 3 and Qwen 2.5 sometimes pass fewer extraction and RAG checks, so prompt changes should be tested per task.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.