QuickScope: Certifying Hard Questions in Dynamic LLM Benchmarks
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
LLM benchmarks are increasingly dynamic: instead of containing a fixed set of questions, they define templates and parameters that can generate an effectively unlimited number of question variants. This flexibility is valuable, but it makes evaluation expensive -- especially when the goal is not just determining an average score, but reliably identifying a model's weak spots. This paper introduces a new methodology for identifying hard questions in dynamic benchmarks. It leverages COUP, a recent Bayesian optimization algorithm (Graham, Velez & Leyton-Brown, 2026), after introducing several substantive modifications to make the algorithm suitable for practical LLM pipelines. We also wrap it in a tool that supports flexible choices of datasets and utility functions, enabling users to target the kinds of questions they care about (e.g., low-accuracy questions; questions that are unusually hard relative to their measured complexity). In experiments across a range of benchmarks, we show that our method, dubbed textttQuickScope, discovers truly difficult questions more sample efficiently than standard baselines, while also reducing false positives from noisy outcomes.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 24 of its 30 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 20 Apr 2026.
Builds on
24 of 30 references.
References · 24
- 2023Universal and Transferable Adversarial Attacks on Aligned Language Modelscited by 3,104
- 2020Extracting Training Data from Large Language Modelscited by 2,189
- 2016Concrete Problems in AI Safetycited by 1,642
- 2023A Survey on Evaluation of Large Language Modelscited by 1,242
- 2022Discovering Language Model Behaviors with Model-Written Evaluationscited by 836
- 2022Quantifying Memorization Across Neural Language Modelscited by 763
- 2021Deduplicating Training Data Makes Language Models Bettercited by 714
- 2016Hyperband: A Novel Bandit-Based Approach to Hyperparameter Optimizationcited by 699
- 2024GSM-Symbolic: Understanding the Limitations of Mathematical Reasoning in Large Language Modelscited by 550
- 2018BOHB: Robust and Efficient Hyperparameter Optimization at Scalecited by 470
- 2024Defending Against Indirect Prompt Injection Attacks With Spotlightingcited by 267
- 2021SMAC3: A Versatile Bayesian Optimization Package for Hyperparameter Optimizationcited by 230
12 more
- 2018A System for Massively Parallel Hyperparameter Tuningcited by 202
- 2021Accounting for Variance in Machine Learning Benchmarkscited by 201
- 2025REASONING GYM: Reasoning Environments for Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewardscited by 130
- 2023DyVal: Dynamic Evaluation of Large Language Models for Reasoning Taskscited by 101
- 2024Benchmark Self-Evolving: A Multi-Agent Framework for Dynamic LLM Evaluationcited by 75
- 2024Evaluation data contamination in LLMs: how do we measure it and (when) does it matter?cited by 32
- 2019Towards Assessing the Impact of Bayesian Optimization's Own Hyperparameterscited by 16
- 2025LastingBench: Defend Benchmarks Against Knowledge Leakagecited by 14
- 2025STEER-ME: Assessing the Microeconomic Reasoning of Large Language Modelscited by 7
- 2025Automatic LLM Red Teamingcited by 5
- 2024Utilitarian Algorithm Configuration for Infinite Parameter Spacescited by 2
- 2025Prism: Dynamic and Flexible Benchmarking of LLMs Code Generation with Monte Carlo Tree Searchcited by 2
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.
1 paper.