User Behavior Prediction as a Generic, Robust, Scalable, and Low-Cost Evaluation Strategy for Estimating Generalization in LLMs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Measuring the generalization ability of Large Language Models (LLMs) is challenging due to data contamination.As models grow and computation becomes cheaper, ensuring tasks and test cases are unseen during training phases will become nearly impossible.We argue that knowledge-retrieval and reasoning tasks are not ideal for measuring generalization, as LLMs are not trained for specific tasks.Instead, we propose user behavior prediction, also a key aspect of personalization, as a theoretically sound, scalable, and robust alternative.We introduce a novel framework for this approach and test it on movie and music recommendation datasets for GPT-4o, GPT-4o-mini, and Llama-3.1-8B-Instruct.Results align with our framework's predictions, showing GPT-4o outperforms GPT-4o-mini and Llama, though all models have much room for improvement, especially Llama.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".