Mirror, Mirror on the Wall -- Which is the Best Model of Them All?

Abstract

Large Language Models (LLMs) have become one of the most transformative tools across many applications, as they have significantly boosted productivity and achieved impressive results in various domains such as finance, healthcare, education, telecommunications, and law, among others. Typically, state-of-the-art (SOTA) foundation models are developed by large corporations based on large data collections and substantial computational and financial resources required to pretrain such models from scratch. These foundation models then serve as the basis for further development and domain adaptation for specific use cases or tasks. However, given the dynamic and fast-paced nature of launching new foundation models, the process of selecting the most suitable model for a particular use case, application, or domain becomes increasingly complex. We argue that there are two main dimensions that need to be taken into consideration when selecting a model for further training: a qualitative dimension (which model is best suited for a task based on information, for instance, taken from model cards) and a quantitative dimension (which is the best performing model). The quantitative performance of models is assessed through leaderboards, which rank models based on standardized benchmarks and provide a consistent framework for comparing different LLMs. In this work, we address the analysis of the quantitative dimension by exploring the current leaderboards and benchmarks. To illustrate this analysis, we focus on the medical domain as a case study, demonstrating the evolution, current landscape, and practical significance of this quantitative evaluation dimension. Finally, we propose a Model Selection Methodology (MSM), a systematic approach designed to guide the navigation, prioritization, and selection of the model that best aligns with a given use case.