HugSelect: An Explainable Multi-Criteria Decision-Support Framework for foundation-model selection

The open-source model ecosystem now contains hundreds of thousands of pretrained models, yet picking the best model for a new dataset is increasingly infeasible: new models and unbenchmarked datasets emerge continuously, leaving practitioners with no prior records on either side. Existing approaches handle only fragments of this in-the-wild setting: AutoML and transferability estimation select models from small predefined pools or require expensive per-model forward passes on the target dataset, while model routing presupposes a given candidate pool. We introduce ModelLens, a unified framework for model recommendation in the wild. Our key insight is that public leaderboard interactions, though scattered and noisy, collectively trace out an implicit atlas of model capabilities across heterogeneous evaluation settings, a signal rich enough to learn from directly. By learning a performance-aware latent space over model--dataset--metric tuples, ModelLens ranks unseen models on unseen datasets without running candidates on the target dataset. On a new benchmark of 1.62M evaluation records spanning 47K models and 9.6K datasets, ModelLens surpasses baselines that either rely on metadata alone or require running each candidate on the target dataset. Its recommended Top-K pools further improve multiple representative routing methods by up to 81% across diverse QA benchmarks. Case studies on recently released benchmarks further confirm generalization to both text and vision-language tasks.

Foundation Models (FMs) are increasingly integrated into remote sensing (RS) pipelines. These models include unimodal vision encoders and multimodal architectures. FMs are adapted to diverse perception tasks, such as image classification, change detection, and visual question answering. However, selecting the most suitable remote sensing foundation model (RSFM) for a specific task remains challenging due to scattered documentation, heterogeneous formats, and complex deployment constraints. To address this, we first introduce the RSFM Database (RS-FMD), the first structured and schema-guided resource covering over 160 RSFMs trained on various data modalities, spanning different spatial, spectral, and temporal resolutions, considering different learning paradigms. Built upon RS-FMD, we further present REMSA, a constraint-aware agent that enables automated RSFM selection from natural language queries. REMSA combines structured FM metadata retrieval with a task-driven decision workflow. In detail, it interprets user input, clarifies missing constraints, ranks models via in-context learning, and provides transparent justifications. Our system supports various RS tasks and data modalities, enabling personalized, reproducible, and efficient FM selection. To evaluate REMSA, we construct a benchmark of 100 expert-verified RS query scenarios. Each query is evaluated across 4 systems and 3 LLM backbones, with the top-3 selected models manually assessed by domain experts. This results in 3,000 expert-scored task--system--model configurations under our novel expert-centered evaluation protocol. REMSA outperforms multiple baselines, showing its practical utility in real decision-making applications. REMSA operates entirely on publicly available metadata of open source RSFMs, without accessing private or sensitive data.

Choosing a Large Language Model (LLM) for a given task requires comparing many strong candidates, yet standard evaluation relies on costly annotations over fixed evaluation sets. To address this challenge, we develop SELECT-LLM, the first framework for active model selection of LLMs. SELECT-LLM aims to find a small set of queries whose annotations are most informative for identifying the best LLM for a given task. To this end, we introduce a query selection rule based on expected information gain, computed from pairwise similarities between candidate model outputs. Because this rule only uses generated model responses, SELECT-LLM can be applied across candidate models without assumptions about their architecture or access to model weights. This makes it suitable for both open-weight and black-box LLMs. We evaluate SELECT-LLM across 23 datasets, 156 evaluated models, diverse task families, and multiple text evaluation metrics. Across all experiments, SELECT-LLM improves over the strongest baseline in every setting, with annotation cost reductions up to 81.8% for best model selection and up to 84.78% for near-best model selection.