Efficient Cost-Aware LLM Evaluation via Bayesian Bandit Gittins Indices

Large language model (LLM) configuration evaluation is challenging due to limited evaluation budgets, varying costs, and multiple competing objectives. In this paper, we formulate LLM configuration evaluation as a cost-aware multi-objective bandit problem, where each configuration evaluation incurs a configuration-dependent cost and yields a noisy vector-valued outcome. Under this framework, we study two fundamental problems: online configuration selection and Pareto configuration identification. For online configuration selection, we propose a hypervolume-based UCB algorithm that optimizes an optimistic hypervolume-per-cost index. We establish a budgeted regret bound of order $O\bigl(\sum_{i\ne i^\star}\frac{\log B}{Δ_i}\bigr)$, where $B$ is the evaluation budget, $i^\star$ is the optimal configuration in terms of hypervolume efficiency, and $Δ_i$ is the corresponding efficiency gap of configuration $i$. This bound retains the logarithmic budget dependence of classical single-objective budgeted bandits. For fixed-budget Pareto identification, we develop a cost-aware empirical gap elimination algorithm and prove that its error probability is of order $O\bigl(\exp(-\frac{B}{H_{μ,c}})\bigr)$, where $H_{μ,c}$ is a cost-aware Pareto identification complexity depending on configuration costs and Pareto classification gaps. This error probability decays exponentially with the evaluation budget and recovers the standard Pareto set identification guarantee when all configuration costs are identical. Experiments on LLM configuration evaluation tasks demonstrate that the proposed framework enables efficient online decision-making and accurate cost-aware Pareto identification under limited budgets.

Selecting the best large language model (LLM) for a fixed benchmark is often expensive, since exhaustive evaluation requires running every model on every example. Multi-armed bandit (MAB) algorithms can reduce the number of LLM calls by sequentially selecting the next model-example pair to evaluate, thereby avoiding wasted evaluations on clearly underperforming models. Further savings can be achieved by predicting model scores from the partially observed model-example score matrix using low-rank factorization. However, such predictions are not ground truth: they can be biased and may therefore lead to incorrect identification of the best model. In this work, we propose a principled framework that combines MAB with cheap predicted scores without compromising statistical validity. Specifically, we derive doubly robust estimators of each model's performance that use the low-rank predictions to reduce variance. This enables the construction of valid finite-sample confidence intervals in our setting, where models are selected adaptively and examples are sampled without replacement. Empirical results on real-world benchmarks show that our approach reduces the number of required evaluations, yielding meaningful savings in compute and cost while accurately identifying the best-performing model.

Large Language Models are typically benchmarked by evaluating every model on every test query. For practitioners seeking the best model to deploy, this is often wasteful: if a model clearly performs worse than others, there is no need to precisely estimate its performance. Best-arm identification algorithms can be naturally applied to drastically reduce costs by adaptively allocating evaluation budget. Further, language models often respond similarly to the same prompt-a property previous work has tried to leverage with mixed success. We propose Synchronized Successive Rejects (SySRs), augmenting the classical Successive Rejects algorithm with paired comparisons. Unlike prior attempts to leverage model similarity in best-model identification, our approach is hyperparameter-free and enjoys performance guarantees that improve with the degree of similarity between evaluated models. Empirically, our method outperforms all baselines in terms of average error rate across 15 standard benchmarks, and in terms of worst-case budget for reliably identifying the best model.