PapersWithELO
← ICLR 2024 leaderboard

FLASK: Fine-grained Language Model Evaluation based on Alignment Skill Sets

Seonghyeon Ye, Doyoung Kim, Sungdong Kim, Hyeonbin Hwang, Seungone Kim, Yongrae Jo, James Thorne, Juho Kim, Minjoon Seo

datasets & benchmarkslarge language modelslanguage model evaluationnatural language processing
40.60100
Fused
band ≈ ±14 pct pts (from σ = 0.29)
41.60100
Mimo
band ≈ ±22 pct pts (from σ = 0.43)
37.70100
DeepSeek
band ≈ ±19 pct pts (from σ = 0.38)

OpenReview ground truth

Accepted

TL;DR — We introduce fine-grained language model evaluation based on alignment skill sets to measure the performance of various LLMs.

Abstract

Evaluation of Large Language Models (LLMs) is challenging because instruction-following necessitates alignment with human values and the required set of skills varies depending on the instruction. However, previous studies have mainly focused on coarse-grained evaluation (i.e. overall preference-based evaluation), which limits interpretability since it does not consider the nature of user instructions that require instance-wise skill composition. In this paper, we introduce FLASK (Fine-grained Language Model Evaluation based on Alignment Skill Sets), a fine-grained evaluation protocol for both human-based and model-based evaluation which decomposes coarse-level scoring to a skill set-level scoring for each instruction. We experimentally observe that the fine-graininess of evaluation is crucial for attaining a holistic view of model performance and increasing the reliability of the evaluation. Using FLASK, we compare multiple open-source and proprietary LLMs and observe a high correlation between model-based and human-based evaluations.

Author context

Most prolific author: 3 submissions (credibility 1.00).

No mass-submission penalty for this paper (authors within normal submission volume).

Aggregate statistics only — no individual author rankings.

Ranking trajectory

Percentile by tournament round — convergence indicates rating stability.

Judge assessments

Mean overall score 0.0 ± 0.0 (n = 36)