REVIEW 1 cited by
Are Small Language Models Ready to Compete with Large Language Models for Practical Applications?
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
Signed reviews
read the original abstract
The rapid rise of Language Models (LMs) has expanded their use in several applications. Yet, due to constraints of model size, associated cost, or proprietary restrictions, utilizing state-of-the-art (SOTA) LLMs is not always feasible. With open, smaller LMs emerging, more applications can leverage their capabilities, but selecting the right LM can be challenging as smaller LMs do not perform well universally. This work tries to bridge this gap by proposing a framework to experimentally evaluate small, open LMs in practical settings through measuring semantic correctness of outputs across three practical aspects: task types, application domains, and reasoning types, using diverse prompt styles. It also conducts an in-depth comparison of 10 small, open LMs to identify the best LM and prompt style depending on specific application requirements using the proposed framework. We also show that if selected appropriately, they can outperform SOTA LLMs like DeepSeek-v2, GPT-4o, GPT-4o-mini, Gemini-1.5-Pro, and even compete with GPT-4o.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Agentic LLMs for Question Answering over Tabular Data
A five-stage NL-to-SQL pipeline with GPT-4o achieves 70.5% on DataBench QA and 71.6% on DataBench Lite QA, beating baselines of 26% and 27%.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.