跳到正文
HuggingFace Daily Papers(社區熱門論文)·· 4 天前AI 評分41

DecisionPivot:評估 LLM 系統決策模型的診斷基準測試

DecisionPivot: A Diagnostic Benchmark for Decision Models in LLM Systems

AI 導讀

DecisionPivot 是一項診斷基準測試,用於評估 LLM 系統中的決策模型在受控變化下的表現。測試涵蓋 48 項任務、40,033 個項目及七種決策角色,並評估準確率、校準和推理投入等指標。兩個 27B 模型在參考軌道僅差 2.6 分,對比組準確率卻分別為 70.1% 和 44.2%。

正文

Published on Oct 20

Authors:

,

,

,

,

,

,

,

,

Abstract

DecisionPivot is a diagnostic benchmark that evaluates decision models across controlled variations, revealing gaps between aggregate accuracy, contrast-group performance, calibration, and reasoning effort.

Decision models support routing, guardrails, and output verification in LLM systems. However, item accuracy alone cannot establish whether models make correct decisions across controlled variations or assign reliable confidence to their predictions. We introduce DecisionPivot, a diagnostic benchmark comprising 48 tasks and 40,033 items across seven decision roles. Its core track contains 7,800 items from 13 generated task families, organized into contrast groups with computed answers verified by independently implemented solvers. The complementary reference track contains 32,233 items from 35 public test sets, preserving their original evaluation metrics. We evaluate 40 decision models and 14 general models using documented, model-specific protocols, assessing item and contrast-group accuracy, probability ordering, calibration, and empirical selective coverage. Our results reveal substantial differences obscured by aggregate scores: two 27B models separated by only 2.6 points on the reference track achieve contrast-group accuracies of 70.1% and 44.2%. Across 2,400 binary contrast pairs, Perplexity Decider correctly ranks the positive member above the negative member in 92.3% of pairs but answers both members correctly in only 74.1%, exposing a gap between probability ordering and decision correctness. Models with similar item accuracy also differ in the reliability of their high-confidence predictions. On a separate 1,296-item subset, GLM-5.3 achieves 93.5\% contrast-group accuracy at a higher reasoning setting, compared with 81.5% at its lowest effort. By linking errors to pivotal details and difficulty levels, DecisionPivot provides fine-grained diagnostics of decision failures that aggregate evaluation alone cannot reveal.

View arXiv page View PDF GitHub 5 Add to collection

Get this paper in your agent:

hf papers read 2610.28522

Don't have the latest CLI?

curl -LsSf https://hf.co/cli/install.sh | bash

Models citing this paper 0

No model linking this paper

Cite arxiv.org/abs/2610.28522 in a model README.md to link it from this page.

Datasets citing this paper 1

startlux-models/DecisionPivot

Preview •

Updated less than a minute ago

•

468

•

3

Spaces citing this paper 0

No Space linking this paper

Cite arxiv.org/abs/2610.28522 in a Space README.md to link it from this page.

Collections including this paper 0

No Collection including this paper

Add this paper to a collection to link it from this page.

來源:HuggingFace Daily Papers(社區熱門論文) · huggingface.co