As language models (LMs) become capable of handling a wide range of tasks, their evaluation is becoming as challenging as their development. Most generation benchmarks currently assess LMs using abstract evaluation criteria-like helpfulness and harmlessness-which often lack the flexibility and granularity of human assessment. Additionally, these benchmarks tend to focus disproportionately on specific capabilities such as instruction following, leading to coverage bias. To overcome these limitations, we introduce the BiGGen Bench, a principled generation benchmark designed to thoroughly evaluate nine distinct capabilities of LMs across 77 diverse tasks. A key feature of the BiGGen Bench is its use of instance-specific evaluation criteria, closely mirroring the nuanced discernment of human evaluation. We apply this benchmark to assess 100 frontier LMs using five evaluator LMs. Our code, data, and evaluation results are all publicly available at https://github.com/prometheus-eval/prometheus-eval.

Benchmarking the performance of information retrieval (IR) is mostly conducted with a fixed set of documents (static corpora). However, in realistic scenarios, this is rarely the case and the documents to be retrieved are constantly updated and added. In this paper, we focus on Generative Retrievals (GR), which apply autoregressive language models to IR problems, and explore their adaptability and robustness in dynamic scenarios. We also conduct an extensive evaluation of computational and memory efficiency, crucial factors for real-world deployment of IR systems handling vast and ever-changing document collections. Our results on the StreamingQA benchmark demonstrate that GR is more adaptable to evolving knowledge (4–11%), robust in learning knowledge with temporal information, and efficient in terms of inference FLOPs (x2), indexing time (x6), and storage footprint (x4) compared to Dual Encoders (DE), which are commonly used in retrieval systems. Our paper highlights the potential of GR for future use in practical IR systems within dynamic environments.

To reduce issues like hallucinations and lack of control in Large Language Models (LLMs), a common method is to generate responses by grounding on external contexts given as input, known as knowledge-augmented models. However, previous research often narrowly defines “grounding” as just having the correct answer, which does not ensure the reliability of the entire response. To overcome this, we propose a stricter definition of grounding: a model is truly grounded if it (1) fully utilizes the necessary knowledge from the provided context, and (2) stays within the limits of that knowledge. We introduce a new dataset and a grounding metric to evaluate model capability under the definition. We perform experiments across 25 LLMs of different sizes and training methods and provide insights into factors that influence grounding performance. Our findings contribute to a better understanding of how to improve grounding capabilities and suggest an area of improvement toward more reliable and controllable LLM applications.