Sign inGet started
Paper · arXiv

How Reusable Are Benchmarks with Richer Feedback?

We study whether benchmarks reliably guide model selection as developers adapt to evaluation feedback across multiple criteria. We find that the worst-case test-set size needed to estimate the best score among $k$ adaptively chosen models, under any convex combination of the criteria, grows exponentially with the number of criteria, reaching the $Θ(\sqrt{k})$ cost of answering $k$ adaptive statistical queries with only $O(\log k)$ criteria, at fixed accuracy and confidence. In attacks on multi-task large language model benchmarks with five to ten criteria, feedback restricted to nondominated task profiles produces large reused-to-held-out score gaps and frequent false winners. These resul...

AuthorsYoussef Allouah, John Duchi
Primary categorycs.LG
Published26 September 2026
Last updated at source26 September 2026
cs.LGstat.ML
Embed this entry
<iframe src="https://silytics.si/embed/item/d436e31e-d410-41a1-af35-30ebcf39d05b" width="420" height="190" style="border:0" loading="lazy" title="Silytics entry"></iframe>

Free, no tracking. More about feeds and embeds.

Silytics shows public metadata from arXiv and links to the original. Information may be incomplete or out of date. Last refreshed 17 October 2026. Licenses and terms of the original apply to the work itself. Not financial, legal or professional advice.