1 option
Practical LLM Evaluation for Production Systems : Measure, monitor, and improve AI system reliability across training and inference / Ammar Mohanna, Indrajit Kar, Zonunfeli Ralte.
- Format:
- Book
- Author/Creator:
- Mohanna, Ammar.
- Language:
- English
- Subjects (All):
- Natural language generation (Computer science).
- Artificial intelligence.
- Physical Description:
- 1 online resource (488 pages)
- Edition:
- 1st ed.
- Place of Publication:
- Birmingham : Packt Publishing, Limited, 2026.
- Summary:
- Build reliable Build reliable AI evaluation frameworks that measure quality, safety, grounding, and production readiness across modern LLM and SLM applicationsFree with your book: DRM-free PDF version + access to Packt's next-gen Reader* Key Features Design evaluation frameworks for LLMs, SLMs, multimodal, reasoning, and agentic AI systems.
- Contents:
- Intro
- Practical LLM Evaluation for Production Systems
- Measure, monitor, and improve AI system reliability across training and inference
- Contributors
- About the authors
- About the reviewers
- Table of Contents
- Preface
- Who this book is for
- What this book covers
- To get the most out of this book
- Download the example code files
- Download the color images
- Conventions used
- Get in touch
- Share your thoughts
- Free benefits with your book
- How to unlock
- Join our Discord and Reddit Space
- 1
- Foundations of LLM Evaluation: Core Concepts and Primitives
- What evaluation means for LLM products
- Evaluation is a decision system, not a score
- Quality is only one axis
- Metrics are not decisions
- What evaluation is not
- Running example setup: The production assistant
- Why traditional ML evaluation breaks for generative and agentic systems
- Open-ended outputs break "single ground truth
- Stochasticity breaks "one run = one answer
- Prompt and context coupling break the model-centric worldview
- Agents break static input-output assumptions
- Defining "working" in production: quality, safety, cost, reliability
- The four-axis definition of working (Q/S/C/R)
- Turning product goals into measurable signals
- Risk tiers and severity mapping
- Definition of "done" for the running assistant, plus rollback criteria
- Evaluation primitives: the shared vocabulary
- Evaluation constructs: from primitives to decisions
- Evaluators, metrics, actions, and thresholds
- Metadata and versioning
- Primitives and what to log
- Building test suites and datasets
- Slice-based sets: Coverage that reflects reality
- Gold sets: What "gold" means for generative tasks
- Adversarial sets: Intentional stress tests
- Synthetic sets: Scale with caution.
- Evaluator types
- Deterministic validators
- Reference-based metrics
- LLM-as-judge
- Human evaluation operations
- Repeatability and statistical sanity under nondeterminism
- What repeatability means for stochastic systems
- Practical variance controls
- Statistical hygiene for product teams
- Evaluator drift
- Regression detection under noise
- From primitives to pipelines: Offline evaluation, online evaluation, regression gates
- Offline evaluation pipeline
- Online evaluation pipeline
- Regression gates: turning metrics into deployment decisions
- Linking offline and online: closed-loop improvement
- Benchmarks vs. production evaluation: What transfers, what misleads, and why
- Evaluation granularity
- Tooling patterns: Harness design, versioning, dashboards, trace storage
- Harness design principles
- Versioning as an evaluation requirement
- Dashboards for decisions, not decoration
- Trace storage for debugging and evaluation
- Tooling as the bridge from concepts to operations
- Running example: An end-to-end evaluation blueprint for a production assistant
- Step 1: Define the system tuple
- Step 2: Define representative cases
- Step 3: Organize cases into suites and slices
- Step 4: Choose evaluators by failure mode
- Step 5: Run the offline evaluation pipeline
- Step 6: Apply gates and connect offline to online
- Step 7: Keep the blueprint lightweight at first
- Common failure modes in real evaluation programs
- Chapter checklist: Minimum Viable Evaluation System
- Skills recap aligned to the book's promises
- Get this book's PDF version and more
- 2
- Building Reliable Text-Only LLMs Through Training-Time Evaluation
- Text-only system boundary, training stages, and training-time evaluation in practice
- Defining the text-only system boundary
- Training stages require different evaluation lenses.
- The training-time evaluation loop
- Data quality gates: Provenance, deduplication, toxicity, format consistency, instruction hygiene
- Provenance and deduplication
- Toxicity and safety content screening
- Format consistency and parser stability
- Instruction hygiene
- Coverage and representativeness: Domain, language, intents, and long-tail slices
- Coverage is slice completeness, not more tokens
- Long-tail behavior and edge-case budgets
- Leakage and contamination: Overlap, benchmark contamination, and memorization risk
- What counts as leakage in practice
- Benchmark contamination is leakage with higher stakes
- Detecting overlap at scale
- Pretraining objective validation: What loss can and cannot tell you
- Instruction tuning evaluation: Instruction-following, constraint adherence, and structured outputs
- Treat instruction following as a set of behaviors
- Constraint adherence: evaluate rules as explicit checks where possible
- Structured outputs as a first-class axis
- Preference tuning evaluation: Trade-offs, over-refusal, and mode collapse
- Make trade-offs explicit with a small drift scorecard
- Over-refusal is a slice problem, not a global problem
- Mode collapse: "safe but unhelpful" replies
- Verbosity drift and cost drift
- Gating preference tuning outcomes
- Safety alignment during training: Harmful completion rate and jailbreak robustness
- Task-specific fine-tuning: Accuracy, error taxonomies, and edge-case budgets
- Generalization and robustness: Out-of-distribution (OOD) sets, paraphrase stability, and adversarial suites
- Efficiency signals that matter later: Tokens, lengths, and compute implications
- Release readiness: Thresholds, model cards, dataset cards, and changelogs
- Case study: Selecting a stronger base model versus fine-tuning
- Summary
- 3.
- Controlling Text-Only LLM Behavior at Inference Time
- The inference pipeline and why it needs controls
- Input validation and intake policies
- Prompt governance as versioned product code
- Output contracts and the bounded reject-repair fallback loop
- Decoding policy and stability under nondeterminism
- Runtime evaluation with calibrated judges and human sampling
- Tool calling correctness and evidence-bound claims
- Retrieval-augmented generation controls and groundedness
- Safety controls as slice-based gates
- Performance and cost as first-class budgets
- Monitoring, drift, and incident response
- Rollout patterns: Shadow, canary, and rollback
- End-to-end inference control blueprint for the running assistant
- 4
- Grounding and Reliability in Vision Language Models During Training
- What makes a vision language model a different evaluation problem?
- Anatomy of a vision-language model as an evaluation target
- Defining grounding: From intuition to measurable property
- What transfers from text-only evaluation and what breaks
- Production tasks, user journeys, and the failure modes they expose
- Mapping VLM production tasks to evaluation requirements
- A production-oriented failure taxonomy for VLMs
- Building evaluation data for visual grounding
- Gold set design for VLMs: Beyond image-caption pairs
- Synthetic and programmatically generated evaluation data
- Adversarial and stress-test probes for grounding
- Signals and metrics for training-time VLM evaluation
- Grounding fidelity metrics
- Hallucination detection and quantification
- Robustness and consistency signals
- Cross-modal alignment metrics
- Pretraining objective validation: Contrastive signal health and in-training retrieval monitoring
- Composing a training-time evaluation dashboard.
- Evaluator selection and calibration
- Human evaluation for visual grounding: Design and pitfalls
- Deterministic and programmatic evaluators
- Model-based graders for VLM evaluation
- From signals to training decisions: Thresholds, gates, and readiness
- Setting thresholds for grounding and hallucination metrics
- Multimodal safety evaluation as a hard training gate
- Checkpoint selection and training stage gates
- Efficiency signals as a parallel deployment gate
- Diagnosing and responding to evaluation failures
- Tooling patterns for VLM training-time evaluation
- Evaluation harness architecture for VLMs
- Versioning, traceability, and reproducibility
- Dashboards, regression reports, and communication artifacts
- Case study: Training-Time evaluation for a production visual document understanding VLM
- System definition and task requirements
- Failure taxonomy applied to document understanding
- Evaluation data, metrics, and evaluator choices in practice
- Thresholds, gate decisions, and a training retrospective
- 5
- Evaluating Visual Grounding and Reliability at Inference Time
- The VLM inference pipeline
- Image intake and input validation
- Visual context handling: What the model actually sees
- Prompt governance for multimodal inputs
- Output contracts for grounded structured outputs
- Decoding policy and stability under visual nondeterminism
- Runtime grounding evaluation with calibrated graders and human sampling
- Evidence-bound visual claims
- Visual grounding controls and groundedness at runtime
- Grounding when retrieval is added to the VLM pipeline
- Multimodal safety controls as runtime slice-based gates
- Performance and cost as first-class budgets at production resolutions
- Monitoring, visual drift, and incident response
- Rollout patterns for VLM systems: shadow, canary, rollback.
- End-to-end inference control blueprint for document-understanding VLM.
- Notes:
- Description based upon print version of record.
- Description based on publisher supplied metadata and other sources.
- ISBN:
- 9781807423889
- OCLC:
- 1601985310
The Penn Libraries is committed to describing library materials using current, accurate, and responsible language. If you discover outdated or inaccurate language, please fill out this feedback form to report it and suggest alternative language.