What's the Difference? Supporting Users in Identifying the Effects of Prompt and Model Changes Through Token Patterns
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Prompt engineering for large language models is challenging, as even small prompt perturbations or model changes can significantly impact the generated output texts. Existing evaluation methods of LLM outputs, either automated metrics or human evaluation, have limitations, such as providing limited insights or being labor-intensive. We propose Spotlight, a new approach that combines both automation and human analysis. Based on data mining techniques, we automatically distinguish between random (decoding) variations and systematic differences in language model outputs. This process provides token patterns that describe the systematic differences and guide the user in manually analyzing the effects of their prompts and changes in models efficiently. We create three benchmarks to quantitatively test the reliability of token pattern extraction methods and demonstrate that our approach provides new insights into established prompt data. From a human-centric perspective, through demonstration studies and a user study, we show that our token pattern approach helps users understand the systematic differences of language model outputs. We are further able to discover relevant differences caused by prompt and model changes (e.g. related to gender or culture), thus supporting the prompt engineering process and human-centric model behavior research.
Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 33 of its 83 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 22 Apr 2025.
Builds on
33 of 83 references.
References · 33
- 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 60,361
- 2021Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problemscited by 10,109
- 2019The Curious Case of Neural Text Degenerationcited by 2,916
- 2023Large Language Models are not Fair Evaluatorscited by 1,085
- 2020Beyond Accuracy: Behavioral Testing of NLP models with CheckListcited by 1,006
- 2022BERTopic: Neural topic modeling with a class-based TF-IDF procedurecited by 801
- 2020SummEval: Re-evaluating Summarization Evaluationcited by 674
- 2024WildChat: 1M ChatGPT Interaction Logs in the Wildcited by 629
- 2019The Woman Worked as a Babysitter: On Biases in Language Generationcited by 541
- 2021Dynabench: Rethinking Benchmarking in NLPcited by 459
- 2022News Summarization and Evaluation in the Era of GPT-3cited by 327
- 2021Do Prompt-Based Models Really Understand the Meaning of their Prompts?cited by 326
21 more
- 2023State of What Art? A Call for Multi-Prompt LLM Evaluationcited by 310
- 2024Do Llamas Work in English? On the Latent Language of Multilingual Transformerscited by 281
- 2024LLMs instead of Human Judges? A Large Scale Empirical Study across 20 NLP Evaluation Taskscited by 243
- 2024WildBench: Benchmarking LLMs with Challenging Tasks from Real Users in the Wildcited by 218
- 2019Identifying and Reducing Gender Bias in Word-Level Language Modelscited by 214
- 2023Marked Personas: Using Natural Language Prompts to Measure Stereotypes in Language Modelscited by 207
- 2023RAIN: Your Language Models Can Align Themselves without Finetuningcited by 157
- 2022Pretrained Language Models for Text Generation: A Surveycited by 122
- 2023ChainForge: A Visual Toolkit for Prompt Engineering and LLM Hypothesis Testingcited by 88
- 2022On the Limitations of Reference-Free Evaluations of Generated Textcited by 52
- 2023You don't need a personality test to know these models are unreliable: Assessing the Reliability of Large Language Models on Psychometric Instrumentscited by 48
- 2022Robustness of Learning from Task Instructionscited by 35
- 2023Zeno: An Interactive Framework for Behavioral Evaluation of Machine Learningcited by 33
- 2024Supporting Sensemaking of Large Language Model Outputs at Scalecited by 27
- 2021Machine Learning Practices Outside Big Tech: How Resource Constraints Challenge Responsible Developmentcited by 21
- 2024What Makes Math Word Problems Challenging for LLMs?cited by 19
- 2021Label-Descriptive Patterns and Their Application to Characterizing Classification Errorscited by 10
- 2020What Makes a Good and Useful Summary? Incorporating Users in Automatic Summarization Researchcited by 8
- 2021A Survey on Task Assignment in Crowdsourcingcited by 8
- 2024SYNTHEVAL: Hybrid Behavioral Testing of NLP Models with Synthetic CheckListscited by 6
- 2024Compare without Despair: Reliable Preference Evaluation with Generation Separabilitycited by 4
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 4.
4 papers.
- 2025MAKIEval: A Multilingual Automatic WiKidata-based Framework for Cultural Awareness Evaluation for LLMscited by 13
- 2025Persistent Personas? Role-Playing, Instruction Following, and Safety in Extended Interactionscited by 12
- 2025EMBRACE: Shaping Inclusive Opinion Representation by Aligning Implicit Conversations with Social Normscited by 1
- 2025InFerActive: Interactive Tree-Based Exploration of LLM Sampling for Safety Evaluationcited by 0
- 2025Persistent Personas? Role-Playing, Instruction Following, and Safety in Extended Interactions14 Dec 2025
- 2025InFerActive: Interactive Tree-Based Exploration of LLM Sampling for Safety Evaluation11 Dec 2025
- 2025EMBRACE: Shaping Inclusive Opinion Representation by Aligning Implicit Conversations with Social Norms27 Jul 2025
- 2025MAKIEval: A Multilingual Automatic WiKidata-based Framework for Cultural Awareness Evaluation for LLMs27 May 2025