The predominant de facto paradigm of testing ML models relies on either using only held-out data to compute aggregate evaluation metrics or by assessing the performance on different subgroups.

While the ImageNet dataset has been driving computer vision research over the past decade, significant label noise and ambiguity have made top-1 accuracy an insufficient measure of further progress.

The predominant de facto paradigm of testing ML models relies on either using only held-out data to compute aggregate evaluation metrics or by assessing the performance on different subgroups.

We will include another sentence in the discussion explicitly addressing the relationship to [41].

Language Models (LMs) are widely used in software engineering for code generation, but they may produce code with errors. Rather than repairing the generated code, an alternative way is to address the underlying failures of models. LM repair offers a lightweight solution to this challenge: it requires minimal data, reduces computational costs, and reduces the side effects. Unlike retraining, LM repair focuses on applying tailored updates to targeted neurons, making it ideal for scenarios with limited resources, high-performance demands, or strict safety requirements. In this paper, we propose \ul{S}emantic \ul{T}argeting for \ul{A}nalytical \ul{R}epair (\textsc{STAR}), a pioneering and novel semantic-based optimization approach for repairing LLMs. \textsc{STAR} realizes main operations in LM repair methods in an optimization process, including locating ``buggy neurons'', solving ``neuron patches'', and patching ``buggy neurons''. Correspondingly, it computes the deltas of weight matrix as the prior information to guide optimization; and attributes the targeted layers and neurons leveraging statistical insights. The neuron patches are computed with a solid semantic-based analytical formula, which directly bridges the changes to logits with the deltas of neurons, by steering latent representations. Compared to the prior work of LM repair (\textsc{MINT}) and optimization methods (\textsc{SGD}), \textsc{STAR} integrates their strengths while mitigating their limitations. \textsc{STAR} supports solving multiple failures together, significantly improving the usefulness. Evaluated on three code generation tasks using popular code LMs, \textsc{STAR} demonstrates superior effectiveness. Additionally, \textsc{STAR} exhibits better efficiency. In terms of side effects, namely the balance between generalization and specificity, \textsc{STAR} outperforms prior work by a significant margin.

When deploying large language models (LLMs), it is important to ensure that these models are not only capable, but also reliable. Many benchmarks have been created to track LLMs' growing capabilities, however there has been no similar focus on measuring their reliability. To understand the potential ramifications of this gap, we investigate how well current benchmarks quantify model reliability. We find that pervasive label errors can compromise these evaluations, obscuring lingering model failures and hiding unreliable behavior. Motivated by this gap in the evaluation of reliability, we then propose the concept of so-called platinum benchmarks, i.e., benchmarks carefully curated to minimize label errors and ambiguity. As a first attempt at constructing such benchmarks, we revise examples from fifteen existing popular benchmarks. We evaluate a wide range of models on these platinum benchmarks and find that, indeed, frontier LLMs still exhibit failures on simple tasks such as elementary-level math word problems. Analyzing these failures further reveals previously unidentified patterns of problems on which frontier models consistently struggle. We provide code at https://github.com/MadryLab/platinum-benchmarks