Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

Anchor Points: Benchmarking Models with Much Fewer Examples

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 2309.08638 v2 pith:U56H2C2M submitted 2023-09-14 cs.CL

classification cs.CL
keywords modelsanchorpointsmodelacrossbehaviordatasetlanguage
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Modern language models often exhibit powerful but brittle behavior, leading to the development of larger and more diverse benchmarks to reliably assess their behavior. Here, we suggest that model performance can be benchmarked and elucidated with much smaller evaluation sets. We first show that in six popular language classification benchmarks, model confidence in the correct class on many pairs of points is strongly correlated across models. We build upon this phenomenon to propose Anchor Point Selection, a technique to select small subsets of datasets that capture model behavior across the entire dataset. Anchor points reliably rank models: across 87 diverse language model-prompt pairs, evaluating models using 1-30 anchor points outperforms uniform sampling and other baselines at accurately ranking models. Moreover, just several anchor points can be used to estimate model per-class predictions on all other points in a dataset with low mean absolute error, sufficient for gauging where the model is likely to fail. Lastly, we present Anchor Point Maps for visualizing these insights and facilitating comparisons of the performance of different models on various regions within the dataset distribution.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

  1. How Benchmark Prediction from Fewer Data Misses the Mark

    cs.LG 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Benchmark prediction methods mostly work by interpolation among similar models and fail on better, unfamiliar models, where random sampling with an AIPW-style correction is the only consistent improvement.

  2. AutoJudger: An Agent-Driven Framework for Efficient Benchmarking of MLLMs

    cs.CL 2025-05 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    An agent-driven framework adaptively selects a small subset of benchmark questions for MLLMs, preserving over 90% ranking accuracy with roughly 4-5% of the data.

Pith tools