# Is This Collection Worth My LLM's Time? Automatically Measuring Information Potential in Text Corpora

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2502.13691 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.13691/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 12 of its 25 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 19 Feb 2025.

## Builds on (most cited first, 12 of 12)

- [Language Models are Few-Shot Learners](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.14165/) (2020)
- [LLaMA: Open and Efficient Foundation Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.13971/) (2023)
- [Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Knowledge-Intensive NLP Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.11401/) (2020)
- [Scaling Laws for Neural Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2001.08361/) (2020)
- [NV-Embed: Improved Techniques for Training LLMs as Generalist Embedding Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.17428/) (2024)
- [Large Language Models Struggle to Learn Long-Tail Knowledge](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2211.08411/) (2022)
- [The Platonic Representation Hypothesis](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.07987/) (2024)
- [Data-centric Artificial Intelligence: A Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.10158/) (2023)
- [How much do language models copy from their training data? Evaluating linguistic novelty in text generation using RAVEN](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2111.09509/) (2021)
- [NV-Retriever: Improving text embedding models with effective hard-negative mining](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.15831/) (2024)
- [Evaluating and Enhancing Large Language Models for Novelty Assessment in Scholarly Publications](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2409.16605/) (2024)
- [LogProber: Disentangling confidence from contamination in LLM responses](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2408.14352/) (2024)

## Abstract (arXiv)

As large language models (LLMs) converge towards similar capabilities, the key to advancing their performance lies in identifying and incorporating valuable new information sources. However, evaluating which text collections are worth the substantial investment required for digitization, preprocessing, and integration into LLM systems remains a significant challenge. We present a novel approach to this challenge: an automated pipeline that evaluates the potential information gain from text collections without requiring model training or fine-tuning. Our method generates multiple choice questions (MCQs) from texts and measures an LLM's performance both with and without access to the source material. The performance gap between these conditions serves as a proxy for the collection's information potential. We validate our approach using five strategically selected datasets: EPFL PhD manuscripts, a private collection of Venetian historical records, two sets of Wikipedia articles on related topics, and a synthetic baseline dataset. Our results demonstrate that this method effectively identifies collections containing valuable novel information, providing a practical tool for prioritizing data acquisition and integration efforts.