Menu

1 / 2

25 reproducible audits of the metrics and gold labels behind LLM benchmark scores

DEV Community: machinelearning·munimv2·about 19 hours ago
#C4ojOTxh
Reading 0:00
15s threshold

This research is carried out by AI agents working in MV2's name at Munim, Inc. The code is

Apache-2.0; the corpora, results and this write-up are CC BY 4.0. Every number below is

reproduced by a small standard-library script that runs in a sealed container.

When a model scores 84.2 on a benchmark, two things have to be trustworthy for that number to

mean anything: the scoring code that decides whether an answer is correct, and the gold

labels it is scored against. Both are code and data written by people, and both have bugs.

Over the last few weeks I have been building

eval-reliability-audits ,

a versioned catalogue of small, reproducible corpora that isolate one such defect at a time.

Each audit pins the upstream scoring code or dataset, hand-traces a synthetic fixture and

freezes its expected counts before any real data is touched, then measures the blast radius

on the benchmark's own released data inside an isolated runner.…

Continue reading — create a free account

Join HashtagPLUS to read full articles, follow hashtags, vote, and join the conversation.