Contamination Inflates Scores but Rarely Reorders Large Language Model Leaderboards
Mirrored from arXiv — NLP / Computation & Language for archival readability. Support the source by reading on the original site.
Computer Science > Computation and Language
Title:Contamination Inflates Scores but Rarely Reorders Large Language Model Leaderboards
Abstract:Benchmark contamination, the leakage of test items into training data, is widely described as a threat to the reliability of large language model (LLM) leaderboards. We argue that this concern conflates two distinct questions: whether contamination inflates absolute scores, and whether it reorders the ranking of models. We recast contamination as a violation of anchor-item invariance and measure it through the differential functioning of original versus semantically equivalent paraphrased items, a within-item contrast that holds the measured skill fixed and isolates memorization from capability. Using per-instance responses from 47 publicly released models and 74 models finetuned with a known dose of contamination, across four benchmarks (ARC, GSM8K, HellaSwag, MMLU), we first calibrate the measure against ground truth: it recovers injected contamination dose-responsively (a corrected effect of +0.187 accuracy points for test-set leakage) and never flags a negative-control model trained only on the legitimate training split (-0.012). We then quantify leaderboard impact: the rank correlation between a standard leaderboard and a paraphrase-controlled leaderboard is 0.997, and a sensitivity analysis shows that the observed differential contamination is far below the level needed to move rankings, with only 3 of 188 model-by-benchmark cases showing differential contamination corroborated across two references. Contamination among these public models is therefore largely uniform: it inflates absolute scores without reordering the leaderboard, and ranking distortion requires the rare case of differential contamination. We provide a calibrated invariance audit, released as a reference implementation, and recommend that leaderboards report paraphrase-controlled rankings alongside confidence intervals.
| Comments: | 21 pages, 4 figures, 3 tables. Code and data: this https URL |
| Subjects: | Computation and Language (cs.CL); Applications (stat.AP); Methodology (stat.ME) |
| Cite as: | arXiv:2609.02899 [cs.CL] |
| (or arXiv:2609.02899v1 [cs.CL] for this version) | |
| https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.02899
arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite
|
Access Paper:
- View PDF
- TeX Source
Current browse context:
References & Citations
Bibliographic and Citation Tools
Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article
Demos
Recommenders and Search Tools
arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
More from arXiv — NLP / Computation & Language
-
Recognition, Simulation, and Refusal: A Contamination-Aware Study of Classic Psychological Effects in LLM Agents
Sep 22
-
Memory That Looks Forward: A Zero-Inference Prospective Term for Personal Memory Retrieval
Sep 22
-
Summarize, Judge, Refine: Decoupled Content Understanding and Policy Learning for Multimodal Content Moderation
Sep 22
-
AI-inferred expressed well-being and collective-action discourse in climate-change campaigns on X
Sep 22
Discussion (0)
Sign in to join the discussion. Free account, 30 seconds — email code or GitHub.
Sign in →No comments yet. Sign in and be the first to say something.