mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Enhancing LLM Evaluations: The Garbling Trick

arXiv 2411.01533 ↗First posted 3 Nov 2024cs.CL cs.AI cs.LGcited by 1

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

As large language models (LLMs) become increasingly powerful, traditional evaluation metrics tend to saturate, making it challenging to distinguish between models. We propose a general method to transform existing LLM evaluations into a series of progressively more difficult tasks. These enhanced evaluations emphasize reasoning capabilities and can reveal relative performance differences that are not apparent in the original assessments. To demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach, we create a new multiple-choice test corpus, extend it into a family of evaluations, and assess a collection of LLMs. Our results offer insights into the comparative abilities of these models, particularly highlighting the differences between base LLMs and more recent "reasoning" models.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 7 of its 21 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 3 Nov 2024.

Builds on

7 of 21 references.

References · 7

  1. 2021Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problemscited by 9,743
  2. 2019HellaSwag: Can a Machine Really Finish Your Sentence?cited by 4,018
  3. 2024MMLU-Pro: A More Robust and Challenging Multi-Task Language Understanding Benchmarkcited by 1,758
  4. 2018Know What You Don't Know: Unanswerable Questions for SQuADcited by 1,538
  5. 2024GSM-Symbolic: Understanding the Limitations of Mathematical Reasoning in Large Language Modelscited by 533
  6. 2024Can Perplexity Reflect Large Language Model's Ability in Long Text Understanding?cited by 45
  7. 2020An Ensemble of Simple Convolutional Neural Network Models for MNIST Digit Recognitioncited by 30

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.

1 paper.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2023Exploring the Reliability of Large Language Models as Customized Evaluators for Diverse NLP Tasks
  2. 2024Can Large Language Models be Trusted for Evaluation? Scalable Meta-Evaluation of LLMs as Evaluators via Agent Debate
  3. 2025Position: On the Methodological Pitfalls of Evaluating Base LLMs for Reasoning
  4. 2025Neither Valid nor Reliable? Investigating the Use of LLMs as Judges
  5. 2024LLM-as-a-Judge & Reward Model: What They Can and Cannot Do
  6. 2025The Self-Execution Benchmark: Measuring LLMs' Attempts to Overcome Their Lack of Self-Execution
  7. 2025RocketEval: Efficient Automated LLM Evaluation via Grading Checklist
  8. 2023TencentLLMEval: A Hierarchical Evaluation of Real-World Capabilities for Human-Aligned LLMs