Question 410
During a root-cause review, the team reports: A proposed LLM wins on general benchmark score but fails grounded FAQ questions more frequently than incumbent. What evidence best identifies the reason?
Explanation
Correct Answer
Correct. Accuracy, faithfulness, relevance and refusal behavior require task-specific scoring, and a model switch needs common test conditions. In the given situation — A proposed LLM wins on general benchmark score but fails grounded FAQ questions more frequently than incumbent. — the targeted diagnose action is: Inspect evaluation data composition, judge criteria, run configuration and sampled failures. It inspects the stage or constraint most likely to explain the observed failure before changing the system.
Incorrect Answers
Not the strongest diagnose choice for this specific question. Inspect which indicators are measured before deployment versus on live traffic and feedback. This action primarily relates to Offline evaluation versus ongoing production monitoring: Offline test datasets catch regressions pre-release; production monitoring detects drift, real-user failures and evolving prompts. However, the described case — A proposed LLM wins on general benchmark score but fails grounded FAQ questions more frequently than incumbent. — is testing Model evaluation with paired benchmarks. It does not directly establish the diagnose outcome or constraint that the question requires; it may still be useful in a different stage or incident.
Not the strongest diagnose choice for this specific question. Inspect vector count, dimension, encoder throughput, per-query latency and measured quality curves. This action primarily relates to Embedding dimensions latency and index storage: Embedding width affects index storage and computation, and larger dimensions do not automatically improve task relevance. However, the described case — A proposed LLM wins on general benchmark score but fails grounded FAQ questions more frequently than incumbent. — is testing Model evaluation with paired benchmarks. It does not directly establish the diagnose outcome or constraint that the question requires; it may still be useful in a different stage or incident.
Not the strongest diagnose choice for this specific question. Inspect experiment runs, source versions, parameter drift and metric definitions. This action primarily relates to Experiment tracking and version reproducibility: MLflow experiments should retain prompt, model, dataset, parameters and evaluation outputs to support a defensible comparison. However, the described case — A proposed LLM wins on general benchmark score but fails grounded FAQ questions more frequently than incumbent. — is testing Model evaluation with paired benchmarks. It does not directly establish the diagnose outcome or constraint that the question requires; it may still be useful in a different stage or incident.