REVIEW 1 cited by
Position: AI Competitions Provide the Gold Standard for Empirical Rigor in GenAI Evaluation
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
Position: AI Competitions Provide the Gold Standard for Empirical Rigor in GenAI Evaluation
read the original abstract
In this position paper, we observe that empirical evaluation in Generative AI is at a crisis point since traditional ML evaluation and benchmarking strategies are insufficient to meet the needs of evaluating modern GenAI models and systems. There are many reasons for this, including the fact that these models typically have nearly unbounded input and output spaces, typically do not have a well defined ground truth target, and typically exhibit strong feedback loops and prediction dependence based on context of previous model outputs. On top of these critical issues, we argue that the problems of leakage and contamination are in fact the most important and difficult issues to address for GenAI evaluations. Interestingly, the field of AI Competitions has developed effective measures and practices to combat leakage for the purpose of counteracting cheating by bad actors within a competition setting. This makes AI Competitions an especially valuable (but underutilized) resource. Now is time for the field to view AI Competitions as the gold standard for empirical rigor in GenAI evaluation, and to harness and harvest their results with according value.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Adaptive Adversaries: A Multi-Turn, Multi-LLM Benchmark for LLM Agent Security
Adaptive multi-turn LLM attacks raise attack success from near 0% to 5.4–14.0% on frontier defenders, with scenario-specific defender weaknesses that aggregate scores hide.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.