mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Scales++: Compute Efficient Evaluation Subset Selection with Cognitive Scales Embeddings

arXiv 2510.26384 ↗First posted 30 Oct 2025cs.AI cs.LGcited by 9

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

The prohibitive cost of evaluating large language models (LLMs) on comprehensive benchmarks necessitates the creation of small yet representative data subsets (i.e., tiny benchmarks) that enable efficient assessment while retaining predictive fidelity. Current methods for this task operate under a model-centric paradigm, selecting benchmarking items based on the collective performance of existing models. Such approaches are limited by large upfront costs, an inability to immediately handle new benchmarks ("cold-start"), and the fragile assumption that future models will share the failure patterns of their predecessors. In this work, we propose a new item-centric approach to benchmark subset selection, arguing that selection should be based on the intrinsic properties of the task items themselves, rather than on model-specific failure patterns. We instantiate this item-centric efficient benchmarking approach via a novel method, Scales++, where data selection is based on the cognitive demands of the benchmark samples. Empirically, we show Scales++ reduces the upfront selection cost by over 18x while achieving competitive predictive fidelity. On the Open LLM Leaderboard, using just a 0.25% data subset, we predict full benchmark scores with a 3.2% mean absolute error, and on Humanity's Last Exam we predict full scores with 2.9% mean absolute error using a 2.0% sample. We demonstrate that this item-centric approach enables more efficient model evaluation without significant fidelity degradation, while also providing better cold-start performance and more interpretable benchmarking.

Key facts. Cited by 9 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 22 of its 32 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 30 Oct 2025.

Builds on

22 of 32 references.

References · 22

  1. 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,199
  2. 2016Semi-Supervised Classification with Graph Convolutional Networkscited by 11,282
  3. 2021Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problemscited by 9,743
  4. 2020Measuring Massive Multitask Language Understandingcited by 7,768
  5. 2020Scaling Laws for Neural Language Modelscited by 6,411
  6. 2018Think you have Solved Question Answering? Try ARC, the AI2 Reasoning Challengecited by 4,710
  7. 2019HellaSwag: Can a Machine Really Finish Your Sentence?cited by 4,018
  8. 2021TruthfulQA: Measuring How Models Mimic Human Falsehoodscited by 2,919
  9. 2018UMAP: Uniform Manifold Approximation and Projection for Dimension Reductioncited by 2,841
  10. 2022Beyond the Imitation Game: Quantifying and extrapolating the capabilities of language modelscited by 1,970
  11. 2024Tulu 3: Pushing Frontiers in Open Language Model Post-Trainingcited by 988
  12. 2024From Crowdsourced Data to High-Quality Benchmarks: Arena-Hard and BenchBuilder Pipelinecited by 484
10 more
  1. 2025Humanity's Last Examcited by 467
  2. 2021AI and the Everything in the Whole Wide World Benchmarkcited by 340
  3. 2024tinyBenchmarks: evaluating LLMs with fewer examplescited by 295
  4. 2023Anchor Points: Benchmarking Models with Much Fewer Examplescited by 84
  5. 2023Efficient Benchmarking of Language Modelscited by 71
  6. 2024metabench -- A Sparse Benchmark of Reasoning and Knowledge in Large Language Modelscited by 35
  7. 2023How Predictable Are Large Language Model Capabilities? A Case Study on BIG-benchcited by 34
  8. 2025General Scales Unlock AI Evaluation with Explanatory and Predictive Powercited by 30
  9. 2025Fluid Language Model Benchmarkingcited by 30
  10. 2023Evidence of interrelated cognitive-like capabilities in large language models: Indications of artificial general intelligence or achievement?cited by 26

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 9.

9 papers.