REVIEW 3 cited by
Changing Answer Order Can Decrease MMLU Accuracy
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
read the original abstract
As large language models (LLMs) have grown in prevalence, particular benchmarks have become essential for the evaluation of these models and for understanding model capabilities. Most commonly, we use test accuracy averaged across multiple subtasks in order to rank models on leaderboards, to determine which model is best for our purposes. In this paper, we investigate the robustness of the accuracy measurement on a widely used multiple choice question answering dataset, MMLU. When shuffling the answer label contents, we find that all explored models decrease in accuracy on MMLU, but not every model is equally sensitive. These findings suggest a possible adjustment to the standard practice of leaderboard testing, where we additionally consider the percentage of examples each model answers correctly by random chance.
Forward citations
Cited by 3 Pith papers
-
Syntax Without Semantics: Teaching Large Language Models to Code in an Unseen Language
Fine-tuning LLMs on an unseen language teaches syntax but fails to transfer semantic competence, leaving Python with up to a 19% performance advantage and no tested intervention closing the gap.
-
RoToR: Towards More Reliable Responses for Order-Invariant Inputs
RoToR makes a frozen LLM order-invariant by circularly rotating a single global sort of segment position IDs, and Selective Routing combines it with the original model for mixed lists.
-
Benchmarking the Pedagogical Knowledge of Large Language Models
The authors release an open benchmark of 1,143 pedagogical knowledge questions from Chilean teacher exams and report accuracy, cost, and size trade-offs for 97 large language models.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.