HackerPapers

arXiv:2502.07445cs.CL

Forget What You Know about LLMs Evaluations -- LLMs are Like a Chameleon

Nurit Cohen-Inger, Yehonatan Elisha, Bracha Shapira, Lior Rokach, Seffi Cohen

HN submission. Found in a submission link or body. Submitters do not count as commenters in the main ranking; a submission is not an endorsement.

Abstract

Large language models (LLMs) often appear to excel on public benchmarks, but these high scores may mask an overreliance on dataset-specific surface cues rather than true language understanding. We introduce the Chameleon Benchmark Overfit Detector (C-BOD), a meta-evaluation framework that systematically distorts benchmark prompts via a parametric transformation and detects overfitting of LLMs. By rephrasing inputs while preserving their semantic content and labels, C-BOD exposes whether a model's performance is driven by memorized patterns. Evaluated on the MMLU benchmark using 26 leading LLMs, our method reveals an average performance degradation of 2.15% under modest perturbations, with 20 out of 26 models exhibiting statistically significant differences. Notably, models with higher baseline accuracy exhibit larger performance differences under perturbation, and larger LLMs tend to be more sensitive to rephrasings, indicating that both cases may overrely on fixed prompt patterns. In contrast, the Llama family and models with lower baseline accuracy show insignificant degradation, suggesting reduced dependency on superficial cues. Moreover, C-BOD's dataset- and model-agnostic design allows easy integration into training pipelines to promote more robust language understanding. Our findings challenge the community to look beyond leaderboard scores and prioritize resilience and generalization in LLM evaluation.

arXiv comments
Journal reference
DOI
Subjects
cs.CLComputation and Language cs.AIArtificial Intelligence cs.LGMachine Learning

On Hacker News

No comments linking this paper were found in the collected sources. Found in 1 HN submission from Feb 2025 to Feb 2025. Open submission discussions.

Comments linking this paper, per year.

Discussed in comments0 threads

No comments linking this paper were found in the collected sources. Open submission discussions.

Submitted to Hacker News

Connected through shared HN threads, not inferred similarity or a recommendation.