Abstract
Language models (LMs) are becoming the foundation for almost all majorlanguage technologies, but their capabilities, limitations, and risks are notwell understood. We present Holistic Evaluation of Language Models (HELM) toimprove the transparency of language models. First, we taxonomize the vastspace of potential scenarios (i.e. use cases) and metrics (i.e. desiderata)that are of interest for LMs. Then we select a broad subset based on coverageand feasibility, noting what's missing or underrepresented (e.g. questionanswering for neglected English dialects, metrics for trustworthiness). Second,we adopt a multi-metric approach: We measure 7 metrics (accuracy, calibration,robustness, fairness, bias, toxicity, and efficiency) for each of 16 corescenarios when possible (87.5% of the time). This ensures metrics beyondaccuracy don't fall to the wayside, and that trade-offs are clearly exposed. Wealso perform 7 targeted evaluations, based on 26 targeted scenarios, to analyzespecific aspects (e.g. reasoning, disinformation). Third, we conduct alarge-scale evaluation of 30 prominent language models (spanning open,limited-access, and closed models) on all 42 scenarios, 21 of which were notpreviously used in mainstream LM evaluation. Prior to HELM, models on averagewere evaluated on just 17.9% of the core HELM scenarios, with some prominentmodels not sharing a single scenario in common. We improve this to 96.0%: nowall 30 models have been densely benchmarked on the same core scenarios andmetrics under standardized conditions. Our evaluation surfaces 25 top-levelfindings. For full transparency, we release all raw model prompts andcompletions publicly for further analysis, as well as a general modulartoolkit. We intend for HELM to be a living benchmark for the community,continuously updated with new scenarios, metrics, and models.