Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.

Gabrielle Berrada

dblp:410/1290 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
1as first author
1since 2021 · last 2025
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 1 first-author · 1 since 2021

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Artificial intelligence
1 paper
Trustworthy machine learning · 33% Language models and text generation · 33% Efficient and distributed learning · 33%

Topics — the 3 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › model validation
active testing
0.912025
Scaling Up Active Testing to Large Language Models · NeurIPS 2025
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning
label-efficient evaluation
0.912025
Scaling Up Active Testing to Large Language Models · NeurIPS 2025
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation
large language model evaluation
0.912025
Scaling Up Active Testing to Large Language Models · NeurIPS 2025

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

in-context learning · 0.9bootstrap estimation · 0.9
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2025 Scaling Up Active Testing to Large Language Models
abstract
Active testing enables label-efficient evaluation of predictive models through careful data acquisition, but it can pose a significant computational cost. We identify cost-saving measures that enable active testing to be scaled up to large language models (LLMs). In particular we show that the surrogate model used to guide data acquisition can be constructed cheaply using in-context learning, does not require updating within an active-testing loop, and can be smaller than the target model. We even find we can make good data-acquisition decisions without making predictions with the target model. As a result we are able to achieve much more accurate evaluations of LLM performance relative to using randomly acquired data. We additionally introduce a bootstrap estimator of evaluation error, which we show to be a useful indicator of how well active testing is working within a single run.
Gabrielle Berrada, Jannik Kossen, Freddie Bickford Smith, Muhammed Razzak, Yarin Gal, Tom Rainforth
NeurIPS1