The reviewed record of science sign in
Pith

arxiv: 2410.09247 · v1 · pith:6OYI7A3L · submitted 2024-10-11 · cs.LG · cs.AI· cs.CL

Benchmark Inflation: Revealing LLM Performance Gaps Using Retro-Holdouts

Reviewed by Pithpith:6OYI7A3Lopen to challenge →

classification cs.LG cs.AIcs.CL
keywords datasetllmsscoresbenchmarkdatadatasetsperformancepublic
0
0 comments X
read the original abstract

The training data for many Large Language Models (LLMs) is contaminated with test data. This means that public benchmarks used to assess LLMs are compromised, suggesting a performance gap between benchmark scores and actual capabilities. Ideally, a private holdout set could be used to accurately verify scores. Unfortunately, such datasets do not exist for most benchmarks, and post-hoc construction of sufficiently similar datasets is non-trivial. To address these issues, we introduce a systematic methodology for (i) retrospectively constructing a holdout dataset for a target dataset, (ii) demonstrating the statistical indistinguishability of this retro-holdout dataset, and (iii) comparing LLMs on the two datasets to quantify the performance gap due to the dataset's public availability. Applying these methods to TruthfulQA, we construct and release Retro-Misconceptions, on which we evaluate twenty LLMs and find that some have inflated scores by as much as 16 percentage points. Our results demonstrate that public benchmark scores do not always accurately assess model properties, and underscore the importance of improved data practices in the field.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

  1. Unsteady Metrics and Benchmarking Cultures of AI Model Builders

    cs.AI 2026-05 accept novelty 8.0

    AI model builders mostly highlight unique benchmarks that act as flexible narrative tools for market positioning rather than standardized scientific measurements.

  2. Reward Hacking Benchmark: Measuring Exploits in LLM Agents with Tool Use

    cs.LG 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    The Reward Hacking Benchmark shows RL post-training raises exploit rates in tool-using LLM agents from 0.6% to 13.9%, with environmental hardening cutting exploits by 87.7% relative without lowering task success.