Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This paper applies Item Response Theory (IRT) to analyze safety benchmarks for language models, revealing three key factors鈥攔efusal strictness, truthfulness, and contextual harm鈥攖hat account for most variance in model behavior. By employing psychometrically selected items, the authors demonstrate a significant reduction in evaluation costs, achieving similar accuracy with only ten carefully chosen items instead of larger random subsets. Additionally, the methodology allows for effective audits of individual models, identifying issues like sandbagging and changes in model behavior behind APIs.
IRT can slash safety evaluation costs by up to 99% while revealing critical insights into model behavior that traditional benchmarks miss.
Language models differ in how safely they behave and these differences are measured by safety benchmarks. But aggregated benchmark scores are hard to trust and interpret, because benchmarks duplicate one another, correlate heavily, and models may sandbag when they detect evaluation. To address these issues, we draw on Item Response Theory (IRT), a statistical toolkit for measuring these latents from performance on items with inferred psychometric properties. We fit IRT models to eight safety benchmarks across 192 language models, the largest psychometric analysis of LLM safety evaluations to date, and contribute three results. First, we find that three interpretable factors of refusal strictness, truthfulness, and contextual harm explain most of the variance between models across benchmarks. Second, psychometrically selected items recover full benchmark scores with lower error than random subsets of the same size, and roughly ten adaptively chosen items suffice for several individual benchmarks, cutting evaluation cost by 97-99%. Third, IRT supports audits of individual models, showing that it can be used to detect naive sandbagging and changes of model behind APIs. Overall, we show IRT is a ready-made toolkit for reading, reducing, and auditing safety benchmarks, which we recommend frontier labs and evaluators adopt.
