REVIEW 3 cited by
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
HiBayES: A Hierarchical Bayesian Modeling Framework for AI Evaluation Statistics
read the original abstract
As Large Language Models (LLMs) and other AI systems evolve, robustly estimating their capabilities from inherently stochastic outputs while systematically quantifying uncertainty in these estimates becomes increasingly important. Further, advanced AI evaluations often have a nested hierarchical structure, exhibit high levels of complexity, and come with high costs in testing the most advanced AI systems. To address these challenges, we introduce HiBayES, a generalizable Hierarchical Bayesian modeling framework for AI Evaluation Statistics. HiBayES supports robust inferences in classical question-answer benchmarks and advanced agentic evaluations, particularly in low-data scenarios (e.g., < 20 data points per evaluation). Built on Generalized Linear Models (GLMs), Bayesian data analysis, and formal model comparison, HiBayES provides principled uncertainty quantification and robust parameter estimation. This paper offers a comprehensive introduction to HiBayES, including illustrative examples, comparisons to conventional statistical methods, and practical guidance for implementing multilevel Bayesian GLMs. Additionally, we provide a HiBayES software package [4] (Beta version) for out-of-the-box implementation.
Forward citations
Cited by 3 Pith papers
-
Multi-Agent AI Control: Distributed Attacks Hamper Per-Instance Monitors
Splitting an attack across more coordinating agents lowers per-commit monitor suspicion, making distributed attacks harder to detect than single-agent attacks.
-
CyclicJudge: Mitigating Judge Bias Efficiently in LLM-based Evaluation
CyclicJudge uses round-robin judge-to-scenario assignment to recover the panel-mean score exactly while using the same number of judge calls as single-judge evaluation.
-
People readily follow personal advice from AI but it does not improve their well-being
Large longitudinal RCT finds high rates of following AI personal advice but no sustained well-being gains versus a hobbies control condition.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.