An Improved Best‐Worst Method Integrated With Combined Compromise Solution for Evaluating Large Language Models

The emergence of large language models (LLMs) has substantially changed the artificial intelligence field, enabling its wide use over different domains. As various LLM alternatives have been developed, the current study proposes a novel decision‐support framework for evaluating and benchmarking LLMs based on multicriteria decision‐making (MCDM) techniques. In the proposed framework, an improved version of the best‐worst method (BWM) is proposed to effectively reduce the computational complexity of assigning a critical weight for the evaluation criteria of LLMs. Then, the improved BWM is integrated with the combined compromise solution (CoCoSo) method for ranking LLM alternatives. Findings show that the improved BWM successfully computes the criteria weights with low computational complexity compared to the original BWM. According to the enhanced BWM, the ‘factual errors’ criterion received the highest significant weight (0.2681), while the ‘logical inconsistencies’ criteria obtained the lowest (0.0827). The rest of the criteria were distributed in between that range. Subsequently, CoCoSo ranked the involved LLM alternatives in two different runs based on the extracted weights. Sensitivity analysis was employed to evaluate the effect of the assessment criteria on LLMs’ evaluation.