VibeCheck is a framework for comparing LLMs. It defines a set of "vibes" to measure qualitative differences and provide an alternative perspective from other evaluation metrics that tend to focus on correctness. Aiming to quantify subjective characteristics like humour or formality is clearly reductionist. But vibes are subjective and context-specific. But does reducing vibes to measures, without considering the context, actually help or hinder making meaningful comparisons between LLMs?

From a reductivism perspective, VibeCheck also assumes human-AI interactions can be explained from a set of vibes. I think this misses the potential for emergent behaviours and co-evolution of practice. So, is the framework too rigid to capture how human-AI interactions will evolve and adapt?

VibeCheck is a framework for comparing LLMs. It defines a set of "vibes" to measure qualitative differences and provide an alternative perspective from other evaluation metrics that tend to focus on correctness. Aiming to quantify subjective characteristics like humour or formality is clearly reductionist. But vibes are subjective and context-specific. But does reducing vibes to measures, without considering the context, actually help or hinder making meaningful comparisons between LLMs?

From a reductivism perspective, VibeCheck also assumes human-AI interactions can be explained from a set of vibes. I think this misses the potential for emergent behaviours and co-evolution of practice. So, is the framework too rigid to capture how human-AI interactions will evolve and adapt?

https://arxiv.org/abs/2410.12851