arXiv Machine Learning
A Calibrated Instrument for Measuring How Inference Optimizations Affect Output Quality
Read the original on arXiv Machine Learning →The Flow has not summarised this story yet — read it at arXiv Machine Learning.
Related stories
Hugging Face Trending Papers
2d ago
A Calibrated Instrument for Measuring How Inference Optimizations Affect Output Quality
Large language model optimization is an active research area, spanning quantization of model weights, early-exit methods for skipping layers, and speculative decoding. Each track uses its own quality...
arXiv Machine Learning
Aug 18
Certifying Compressed Language Models: An Audit and a Statistical Toolkit
arXiv:2608. 15046v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: A fraction of a point of benchmark accuracy is the usual evidence that a compressed model is equivalent to its original.
arXiv Computation and Language
Sep 1
When Calibration Rankings Reverse: Accuracy-Controlled Evaluation for Fair Comparison of LLMs
The paper argues that traditional global calibration metrics, such as Expected Calibration Error and Brier Score, are confounded by differences in model accuracy when comparing large language models. It introduces ACE, an accuracy‑controlled evaluation framework that offers Instance‑Aligned, Distribution‑Aligned, and Candidate‑Aligned views to provide fairer cross‑model comparisons. Experiments across various benchmarks reveal that many reported calibration advantages disappear after accuracy control and that model rankings often reverse, indicating that raw global metrics are unreliable for cross‑model calibration assessment.
arXiv AI
Aug 13
The Wording Effect: Quantifying Two-Way Drift in LLM Benchmark Performance
arXiv:2608. 11694v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: A benchmark score comes from a single phrasing of each problem.
Hugging Face Trending Papers
Aug 11
Actions Speak Louder than Words: Measuring Cross-Lingual Policy Retention in Tool-Using Agents
When a tool-using agent is given the same task in a different language, does it still take the same steps? Multilingual evaluation rarely asks: it compares final answers and discards the actions.
arXiv AI
Sep 7
When Do Internal Probes Beat Reading the Answer? Miscalibrated Readouts and Behavior-Concealed Knowledge in Language Models
A 0.6B language model consistently answers YES to 1,200 logical tests, yet its behavior shows no discrimination. Linear probes reveal the correct verdict with high AUC (0.96) and transfer to unseen structures, but a single scalar readout fails due to a saturated decision threshold offset by +4.6 σ. Adjusting this threshold restores behavior accuracy from 50 % to 81 % and improves higher‑scale models, demonstrating that miscalibrated readouts, not hidden knowledge loss, drive performance gaps.