Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

ConceptPsy:A Benchmark Suite with Conceptual Comprehensiveness in Psychology

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2311.09861 v4 pith:ABQPKA5U submitted 2023-11-16 cs.CL cs.AI

classification cs.CLcs.AI
keywords psychologyconceptpsyllmsconceptsquestionstheybenchmarkbenchmarks
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

The critical field of psychology necessitates a comprehensive benchmark to enhance the evaluation and development of domain-specific Large Language Models (LLMs). Existing MMLU-type benchmarks, such as C-EVAL and CMMLU, include psychology-related subjects, but their limited number of questions and lack of systematic concept sampling strategies mean they cannot cover the concepts required in psychology. Consequently, despite their broad subject coverage, these benchmarks lack the necessary depth in the psychology domain, making them inadequate as psychology-specific evaluation suite. To address this issue, this paper presents ConceptPsy, designed to evaluate Chinese complex reasoning and knowledge abilities in psychology. ConceptPsy includes 12 core subjects and 1383 manually collected concepts. Specifically, we prompt GPT-4 to generate questions for each concept using carefully designed diverse prompts and hire professional psychologists to review these questions. To help to understand the fine-grained performances and enhance the weaknesses, we annotate each question with a chapter label and provide chapter-wise accuracy. Based on ConceptPsy, we evaluate a broad range of LLMs. We observe that, although some LLMs achieve similar accuracies on overall performances, they exhibit significant performance variations across different psychology concepts, even when they are models from the same series. We hope our work can facilitate the development of LLMs in the field of psychology.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. KRISTEVA: Close Reading as a Novel Task for Benchmarking Interpretive Reasoning

    cs.CL 2025-05 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    KRISTEVA is the first close reading benchmark for large language models, and current models still underperform experienced human readers on 10 of its 11 tasks.

Pith tools