NLP Evaluation in trouble: On the Need to Measure LLM Data Contamination for each Benchmark (2023.findings-emnlp)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing methods for evaluating large language models using annotated benchmarks are in trouble . data contamination can cause wrong scientific conclusions being published . |
| Approach: | They argue that the evaluation of NLP tasks using annotated benchmarks is in trouble . they define different levels of data contamination and propose a community effort . |
| Outcome: | The proposed measures should detect when data from a benchmark was exposed to a model and flag papers with conclusions compromised by data contamination. |
Similar Papers
Benchmarking Large Language Models Under Data Contamination: A Survey from Static to Dynamic Evaluation (2025.emnlp-main)
Copied to clipboard
Simin Chen, Yiming Chen, Zexin Li, Yifan Jiang, Zhongwei Wan, Yixin He, Dezhi Ran, Tianle Gu, Haizhou Li, Tao Xie, Baishakhi Ray
| Challenge: | In the era of evaluating large language models, data contamination is an increasingly prominent concern . static benchmarking has been used for evaluation, but there are limitations of *dynamic* benchmarks . |
| Approach: | They propose a series of optimal design principles for *dynamic* benchmarking and analyze the limitations of existing *static* benchmarks. |
| Outcome: | The proposed benchmarks highlight a critical gap in the evaluation of LLMs. |
Leak, Cheat, Repeat: Data Contamination and Evaluation Malpractices in Closed-Source LLMs (2024.eacl-long)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Lack of access to model details has raised concerns about data contamination among researchers. |
| Approach: | They conduct the first systematic analysis of work using OpenAI’s GPT-3.5 and GPT-4, the most prominently used LLMs today, in the context of data contamination. |
| Outcome: | The proposed models have been exposed to 4.7M samples from 263 benchmarks during the first year after their release. |
Quantifying Contamination in Evaluating Code Generation Capabilities of Language Models (2024.acl-long)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Recent studies have shown that large language models are contaminated with data from pretraining and finetuning tasks. |
| Approach: | They perform extensive analysis on the factors that affect model memorization and generalization, such as model size, problem difficulty, and question length. |
| Outcome: | The results show that models perform better on the subset of the benchmarks where similar solutions are seen during training. |
Unveiling the Spectrum of Data Contamination in Language Model: A Survey from Detection to Remediation (2024.findings-acl)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Data contamination is a problem in Large language models due to the reliance on extensive internet-derived training corpora. |
| Approach: | They present a survey on the topic of data contamination in large language models. |
| Outcome: | The results of the first survey on data contamination in large language models provide a comprehensive guide for NLP researchers seeking a systematic understanding of the issue. |
Are LLMs Better than Reported? Detecting Label Errors and Mitigating Their Effect on Model Performance (2025.emnlp-main)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Recent advances in large language models (LLMs) offer new opportunities to enhance the annotation process, particularly for detecting label errors in existing datasets. |
| Approach: | They propose to use an ensemble of large language models to flag mislabeled examples by using an LLM-as-a-judge approach to detect label errors in existing datasets. |
| Outcome: | The proposed method improves label accuracy and consistency in large language models. |
Towards Data Contamination Detection for Modern Large Language Models: Limitations, Inconsistencies, and Oracle Challenges (2025.coling-main)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing methods for detecting data contamination in large language models have limitations and limitations . data contamination occurs when test or evaluation data is exposed to the model during its training phases . |
| Approach: | They evaluate five different methods for detecting data contamination in large language models . they find that current methods have non-trivial limitations in their assumptions and practical applications . |
| Outcome: | The proposed methods have non-trivial limitations and difficulties in detecting contamination . the authors highlight the complexity of contamination detection in advanced LLMs . |
In Benchmarks We Trust ... Or Not? (2025.emnlp-main)
Copied to clipboard
Ine Gevers, Victor De Marez, Jens Van Nooten, Jens Lemmens, Andriy Kosar, Ehsan Lotfi, Nikolay Banar, Pieter Fivez, Luna De Bruyne, Walter Daelemans
| Challenge: | Existing benchmarks for Large Language Models (LLMs) are inadequate and lack a clear solution. |
| Approach: | They propose checklists to cover all aspects of benchmarking issues, both for benchmark creation and usage. |
| Outcome: | The proposed checklists cover all aspects of benchmarking issues, both for benchmark creation and usage. |
Investigating Data Contamination in Modern Benchmarks for Large Language Models (2024.naacl-long)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing evaluation benchmarks for large language models are inflated and inconsistent with actual performance. |
| Approach: | They propose a retrieval-based system to explore potential overlaps between benchmarks and pretraining corpora and a protocol to investigate testset slot guessing. |
| Outcome: | The proposed method exploits overlaps between evaluation benchmarks and pretraining corpora and masks a wrong answer in a multiple choice question and prompts the model to fill in the gap. |
Does Data Contamination Detection Work (Well) for LLMs? A Survey and Evaluation on Detection Assumptions (2025.findings-naacl)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Large language models have demonstrated great performance across various benchmarks, but data contamination is a concern in their evaluation. |
| Approach: | They analyze 50 papers on data contamination detection and test three of them as case studies to identify the possibility of data contamination. |
| Outcome: | The proposed methods can detect membership inference attacks on instance-level data, and can perform similar to random guessing on LLM pretraining datasets. |
When Benchmarks Leak: Inference-Time Decontamination for LLMs (2026.acl-long)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | a large number of large language models (LLMs) are being evaluated for their performance, but their reliability is threatened by test set contamination. |
| Approach: | They propose a framework that decontaminates large language models by applying small perturbations to the input embedding space. |
| Outcome: | The proposed framework achieves strong decontamination effectiveness while incurring minimal degradation in benign utility. |