Assessing and Verifying Task Utility in LLM-Powered Applications
2405.02178
0
0
🧠
Abstract
The rapid development of Large Language Models (LLMs) has led to a surge in applications that facilitate collaboration among multiple agents, assisting humans in their daily tasks. However, a significant gap remains in assessing to what extent LLM-powered applications genuinely enhance user experience and task execution efficiency. This highlights the need to verify utility of LLM-powered applications, particularly by ensuring alignment between the application's functionality and end-user needs. We introduce AgentEval, a novel framework designed to simplify the utility verification process by automatically proposing a set of criteria tailored to the unique purpose of any given application. This allows for a comprehensive assessment, quantifying the utility of an application against the suggested criteria. We present a comprehensive analysis of the effectiveness and robustness of AgentEval for two open source datasets including Math Problem solving and ALFWorld House-hold related tasks. For reproducibility purposes, we make the data, code and all the logs publicly available at https://bit.ly/3w3yKcS .
Get summaries of the top AI research delivered straight to your inbox:
Overview
- The paper explores the development of Large Language Models (LLMs) and their applications in facilitating collaboration among multiple agents to assist humans in their daily tasks.
- The authors identify a gap in assessing the extent to which LLM-powered applications enhance user experience and task execution efficiency, and highlight the need to verify the utility of such applications.
- The paper introduces AgentEval, a novel framework designed to simplify the utility verification process by automatically proposing a set of criteria tailored to the unique purpose of any given application.
Plain English Explanation
Large language models (LLMs) are advanced AI systems that can understand and generate human-like text. The rapid development of LLMs has led to a surge in applications that help people with their daily tasks by collaborating with multiple agents. However, there is a gap in understanding how well these LLM-powered applications actually improve the user experience and make tasks more efficient.
The AgentEval framework introduced in this paper aims to address this gap. It automatically suggests a set of criteria to assess the utility of any LLM-powered application, based on the application's specific purpose. This allows for a comprehensive evaluation of the application's usefulness, ensuring that it is aligned with the end-user's needs.
The paper presents a detailed analysis of how well AgentEval works for two types of tasks: solving math problems and completing household-related tasks in a simulated environment. The researchers make the data, code, and all the logs publicly available so that others can reproduce their findings.
Technical Explanation
The paper focuses on the challenge of verifying the utility of LLM-powered applications, which are becoming increasingly prevalent in assisting humans with various tasks. The authors argue that a significant gap exists in understanding the extent to which these applications genuinely enhance user experience and task execution efficiency.
To address this gap, the researchers introduce AgentEval, a novel framework that automatically proposes a set of criteria tailored to the unique purpose of any given application. This allows for a comprehensive assessment of the application's utility, quantifying its performance against the suggested criteria.
The authors present a comprehensive analysis of the effectiveness and robustness of AgentEval using two open-source datasets: one focused on math problem-solving and the other on ALFWorld household-related tasks. The analysis demonstrates the ability of AgentEval to provide a detailed and objective evaluation of the utility of LLM-powered applications, ensuring alignment between the application's functionality and end-user needs.
Critical Analysis
The paper highlights an important issue in the rapidly evolving field of LLM-powered applications: the need to rigorously evaluate their utility and ensure they meet the end-users' needs. The introduction of AgentEval is a promising step towards addressing this challenge, as it provides a systematic approach to assessing the utility of such applications.
However, the paper also acknowledges the limitations of the current study, such as the need to expand the evaluation to a wider range of applications and tasks. Additionally, the authors mention the potential for further research to explore the generalizability of AgentEval across different domains and the impact of various design choices on the framework's performance.
It would also be valuable to consider the ethical implications of LLM-powered applications, particularly in terms of transparency, accountability, and the potential for biases or unintended consequences. The paper could have addressed these concerns more explicitly, providing a more holistic perspective on the development and deployment of such technologies.
Conclusion
The AgentEval framework introduced in this paper represents a significant step towards addressing the challenge of verifying the utility of LLM-powered applications. By automatically proposing tailored criteria for assessing an application's performance, AgentEval enables a more comprehensive and objective evaluation, ensuring that these technologies are aligned with end-user needs.
The comprehensive analysis presented in the paper demonstrates the effectiveness and robustness of AgentEval, providing valuable insights for researchers and developers working in this rapidly evolving field. As LLM-powered applications continue to proliferate, the principles and methods outlined in this work can help drive the development of more useful and user-centric technologies that truly enhance human capabilities and experiences.
This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!
Related Papers
Exploring Autonomous Agents through the Lens of Large Language Models: A Review
Saikat Barua
0
0
Large Language Models (LLMs) are transforming artificial intelligence, enabling autonomous agents to perform diverse tasks across various domains. These agents, proficient in human-like text comprehension and generation, have the potential to revolutionize sectors from customer service to healthcare. However, they face challenges such as multimodality, human value alignment, hallucinations, and evaluation. Techniques like prompting, reasoning, tool utilization, and in-context learning are being explored to enhance their capabilities. Evaluation platforms like AgentBench, WebArena, and ToolLLM provide robust methods for assessing these agents in complex scenarios. These advancements are leading to the development of more resilient and capable autonomous agents, anticipated to become integral in our digital lives, assisting in tasks from email responses to disease diagnosis. The future of AI, with LLMs at the forefront, is promising.
4/9/2024
🚀
Which LLM should I use?: Evaluating LLMs for tasks performed by Undergraduate Computer Science Students
Vibhor Agarwal, Madhav Krishan Garg, Sahiti Dharmavaram, Dhruv Kumar
0
0
This study evaluates the effectiveness of various large language models (LLMs) in performing tasks common among undergraduate computer science students. Although a number of research studies in the computing education community have explored the possibility of using LLMs for a variety of tasks, there is a lack of comprehensive research comparing different LLMs and evaluating which LLMs are most effective for different tasks. Our research systematically assesses some of the publicly available LLMs such as Google Bard, ChatGPT(3.5), GitHub Copilot Chat, and Microsoft Copilot across diverse tasks commonly encountered by undergraduate computer science students in India. These tasks include code explanation and documentation, solving class assignments, technical interview preparation, learning new concepts and frameworks, and email writing. Evaluation for these tasks was carried out by pre-final year and final year undergraduate computer science students and provides insights into the models' strengths and limitations. This study aims to guide students as well as instructors in selecting suitable LLMs for any specific task and offers valuable insights on how LLMs can be used constructively by students and instructors.
4/4/2024
🚀
Who Validates the Validators? Aligning LLM-Assisted Evaluation of LLM Outputs with Human Preferences
Shreya Shankar, J. D. Zamfirescu-Pereira, Bjorn Hartmann, Aditya G. Parameswaran, Ian Arawjo
0
0
Due to the cumbersome nature of human evaluation and limitations of code-based evaluation, Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly being used to assist humans in evaluating LLM outputs. Yet LLM-generated evaluators simply inherit all the problems of the LLMs they evaluate, requiring further human validation. We present a mixed-initiative approach to ``validate the validators'' -- aligning LLM-generated evaluation functions (be it prompts or code) with human requirements. Our interface, EvalGen, provides automated assistance to users in generating evaluation criteria and implementing assertions. While generating candidate implementations (Python functions, LLM grader prompts), EvalGen asks humans to grade a subset of LLM outputs; this feedback is used to select implementations that better align with user grades. A qualitative study finds overall support for EvalGen but underscores the subjectivity and iterative process of alignment. In particular, we identify a phenomenon we dub emph{criteria drift}: users need criteria to grade outputs, but grading outputs helps users define criteria. What is more, some criteria appears emph{dependent} on the specific LLM outputs observed (rather than independent criteria that can be defined emph{a priori}), raising serious questions for approaches that assume the independence of evaluation from observation of model outputs. We present our interface and implementation details, a comparison of our algorithm with a baseline approach, and implications for the design of future LLM evaluation assistants.
4/19/2024
AgentQuest: A Modular Benchmark Framework to Measure Progress and Improve LLM Agents
Luca Gioacchini, Giuseppe Siracusano, Davide Sanvito, Kiril Gashteovski, David Friede, Roberto Bifulco, Carolin Lawrence
0
0
The advances made by Large Language Models (LLMs) have led to the pursuit of LLM agents that can solve intricate, multi-step reasoning tasks. As with any research pursuit, benchmarking and evaluation are key corner stones to efficient and reliable progress. However, existing benchmarks are often narrow and simply compute overall task success. To face these issues, we propose AgentQuest -- a framework where (i) both benchmarks and metrics are modular and easily extensible through well documented and easy-to-use APIs; (ii) we offer two new evaluation metrics that can reliably track LLM agent progress while solving a task. We exemplify the utility of the metrics on two use cases wherein we identify common failure points and refine the agent architecture to obtain a significant performance increase. Together with the research community, we hope to extend AgentQuest further and therefore we make it available under https://github.com/nec-research/agentquest.
4/10/2024