arXiv Computation and Language
Large Language Model Selection with Limited Annotations
Read the original on arXiv Computation and Language →The Flow has not summarised this story yet — read it at arXiv Computation and Language.
Related stories
Hugging Face Trending Papers
Sep 1
From Confusion to Clarity: Confusion-Aware Retrieval and Knowledge Injection for Text Classification
Large language models (LLMs) struggle to classify text into taxonomies with many semantically similar labels, as the distinctions are domain-specific and not captured by pre-training. To handle large...
arXiv Computation and Language
1d ago
MERGE: Multi-LLM Ensemble for Retrieval via Generative Enrichment
arXiv:2609.37574v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly used to enrich user queries in information retrieval (IR) so that a standard retriever such as BM25 can...
arXiv AI
Sep 2
From Confusion to Clarity: Confusion-Aware Retrieval and Knowledge Injection for Text Classification
arXiv:2609.01564v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) struggle to classify text into taxonomies with many semantically similar labels, as the distinctions are domain-specific...
arXiv AI
Aug 25
LLM-Specific Utility for Retrieval-Augmented Generation
The paper introduces the concept of LLM‑specific utility, defining it as the performance gain a target large language model (LLM) achieves when provided with a passage compared to answering without evidence. A benchmark of utilitarian passages is built for four LLMs (Qwen3‑8B/14B/32B and Llama 3.1‑8B) across three QA datasets, revealing that each model benefits most from its own tailored evidence and that evidence optimized for other models is consistently suboptimal. The authors also create SpecUBench, a benchmark for LLM‑specific utility judgment, and show that current utility‑aware retrieval methods largely capture model‑agnostic usefulness, struggling to estimate LLM‑specific utility. "whyItMatters":"The study demonstrates that retrieval‑augmented generation must consider model‑specific evidence selection to truly improve LLM performance, highlighting a gap in existing utility‑aware methods."
arXiv Machine Learning
Jul 22
How Benchmark Prediction from Fewer Data Misses the Mark
arXiv:2506. 07673v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Large language model (LLM) evaluation is increasingly costly, prompting interest in methods that speed up evaluation by shrinking benchmark datasets.
arXiv Computation and Language
Sep 1
Large Language Models Systematically Favor Popular Options: Evidence and Mitigation Across MCQs
arXiv:2608.29257v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Multiple-choice questions (MCQs) are a standard format for evaluating large language models (LLMs), yet the popularity of answer options can confound e...