A User-Centric Multi-Intent Benchmark for Evaluating Large Language Models
This provides a practical benchmark for users to assess LLMs based on their specific needs, though it is incremental as it builds on existing evaluation methods.
The paper tackles the problem of evaluating large language models (LLMs) from a user-centric perspective to help users select suitable services, by creating a benchmark based on 1,846 real-world use cases and showing high correlation (0.95 and 0.94) with human preferences.
Large language models (LLMs) are essential tools that users employ across various scenarios, so evaluating their performance and guiding users in selecting the suitable service is important. Although many benchmarks exist, they mainly focus on specific predefined model abilities, such as world knowledge, reasoning, etc. Based on these ability scores, it is hard for users to determine which LLM best suits their particular needs. To address these issues, we propose to evaluate LLMs from a user-centric perspective and design this benchmark to measure their efficacy in satisfying user needs under distinct intents. Firstly, we collect 1,846 real-world use cases from a user study with 712 participants from 23 countries. This first-hand data helps us understand actual user intents and needs in LLM interactions, forming the User Reported Scenarios (URS) dataset, which is categorized with six types of user intents. Secondly, based on this authentic dataset, we benchmark 10 LLM services with GPT-4-as-Judge. Thirdly, we show that benchmark scores align well with human preference in both real-world experience and pair-wise annotations, achieving Pearson correlations of 0.95 and 0.94, respectively. This alignment confirms that the URS dataset and our evaluation method establish an effective user-centric benchmark. The dataset, code, and process data are available at https://github.com/Alice1998/URS.