arXiv subjects

Phoebe Thacker

Publications and source records attributed to Phoebe Thacker.

4 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

LifeVal: Evaluating AI Model Performance on Personalized Agentic Consumer Tasks

We introduce LifeVal, a benchmark evaluating AI model performance on personalized agentic consumer tasks. LifeVal covers the most valuable life tasks that a personalized digital superassistant could automate, representing over 1.7 trillion US dollars in annual willingness-to-pay across 148 consumer task categories (e.g., managing finances, moving apartments, searching for a job, finding childcare). To construct our activity distribution, we conducted a new survey of willingness-to-pay for a digital superassistant across a demographically representative sample of over 3,800 consumers, cross-referencing our results against the American Time Use Survey (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2025) and the Multinational Time Use Study (Fisher et al., 2025). For the most valuable consumer activities, we recruited task creators to create AI evaluation tasks personalized using real ChatGPT conversations and memories, reference files, and personal context. Task creators had to pass our expertise threshold (including personally completing the task multiple times and seeing the results through in their real lives for over a year) and also write a rubric, ensuring that our evaluation measured the best personalized completion for that task. All tasks had to pass at least three rounds of human quality-control before acceptance into our final evaluation sets.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2025

GDPval: Evaluating AI Model Performance on Real-World Economically Valuable Tasks

We introduce GDPval, a benchmark evaluating AI model capabilities on real-world economically valuable tasks. GDPval covers the majority of U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics Work Activities for 44 occupations across the top 9 sectors contributing to U.S. GDP (Gross Domestic Product). Tasks are constructed from the representative work of industry professionals with an average of 14 years of experience. We find that frontier model performance on GDPval is improving roughly linearly over time, and that the current best frontier models are approaching industry experts in deliverable quality. We analyze the potential for frontier models, when paired with human oversight, to perform GDPval tasks cheaper and faster than unaided experts. We also demonstrate that increased reasoning effort, increased task context, and increased scaffolding improves model performance on GDPval. Finally, we open-source a gold subset of 220 tasks and provide a public automated grading service at evals.openai.com to facilitate future research in understanding real-world model capabilities.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2022

Improving alignment of dialogue agents via targeted human judgements

We present Sparrow, an information-seeking dialogue agent trained to be more helpful, correct, and harmless compared to prompted language model baselines. We use reinforcement learning from human feedback to train our models with two new additions to help human raters judge agent behaviour. First, to make our agent more helpful and harmless, we break down the requirements for good dialogue into natural language rules the agent should follow, and ask raters about each rule separately. We demonstrate that this breakdown enables us to collect more targeted human judgements of agent behaviour and allows for more efficient rule-conditional reward models. Second, our agent provides evidence from sources supporting factual claims when collecting preference judgements over model statements. For factual questions, evidence provided by Sparrow supports the sampled response 78% of the time. Sparrow is preferred more often than baselines while being more resilient to adversarial probing by humans, violating our rules only 8% of the time when probed. Finally, we conduct extensive analyses showing that though our model learns to follow our rules it can exhibit distributional biases.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2022

Human-centered mechanism design with Democratic AI

Building artificial intelligence (AI) that aligns with human values is an unsolved problem. Here, we developed a human-in-the-loop research pipeline called Democratic AI, in which reinforcement learning is used to design a social mechanism that humans prefer by majority. A large group of humans played an online investment game that involved deciding whether to keep a monetary endowment or to share it with others for collective benefit. Shared revenue was returned to players under two different redistribution mechanisms, one designed by the AI and the other by humans. The AI discovered a mechanism that redressed initial wealth imbalance, sanctioned free riders, and successfully won the majority vote. By optimizing for human preferences, Democratic AI may be a promising method for value-aligned policy innovation.

cs.AI↗