LLM Evaluation Hub

Ship changes without regressions: eval suite, CI gates, monitoring

This hub helps you set up a measurement system: test harness, benchmarks, CI gates, and monitoring signals so quality doesn't drift over time. Eval strategy, judge model pitfalls, and before/after proof.

Common eval & regression pains

Ship changes without knowing if quality regressed
🎲Eval flakiness: judge model inconsistent across runs
📉LLM eval that doesn't correlate with business KPI
🐛No regression gates — bugs slip into production
📈Quality drifts over time with no alerting
🔄Eval strategy

Offline vs online evaluation

Both matter. Offline for fast gates; online for real-world correlation and drift detection.

1

Offline evaluation

Run on fixed test set before release. Fast feedback; no production traffic. Use for pre-merge and pre-release gates.

When: CI/CD, PR checks, release validation.
2

Online evaluation

Measure on live traffic (sampled). Reflects real user distribution and edge cases. Lag between deploy and signal.

When: Post-release monitoring, A/B tests, shadow traffic.
3

Hybrid

Offline gates for blocking regressions; online for drift detection and correlation with business outcomes.

When: Production-grade LLM apps. Both are needed.
📂Dataset building

From logs, sampling, labeling

How to build an LLM eval suite that correlates with business KPI. Start from production evidence.

From production logs

Sample failures and successes. Stratify by cohort, use case, query type. Golden set that reflects real traffic.

Sampling strategy

Don't just take random. Oversample edge cases, failures, high-value queries. Balance coverage vs size.

Labeling

Human labels for ground truth. Rubrics for consistency. Consider LLM-as-judge with human calibration.

Versioning

Eval set evolves. Version it. Track which model/config was validated against which set.

Quality metrics

Accuracy, consistency, groundedness, safety

Quality metrics for LLM apps. Pick metrics that matter for your use case and correlate with outcomes.

1

Accuracy / task success

Did the model do the right thing? Task-specific: classification, extraction, generation quality.

2

Consistency

Same query, multiple runs: do answers agree? Reduces 'random' feel; catches non-determinism.

3

Groundedness

Is the answer supported by context? Hallucination detection. Citation coverage. Ungrounded rate.

4

Safety / policy

Refusal correctness, PII leakage, policy violations. Safety eval suite separate from quality.

🚦Regression gates

CI gates + release checklist

Prevent LLM regressions in production. Gate at merge, gate at release, monitor post-deploy.

1

Pre-merge: smoke eval

Small, fast suite on every PR. Catches obvious breakage. Must complete in minutes.

2

Pre-release: full eval

Larger suite before deploy. Block release if metrics drop below threshold. Versioned thresholds.

3

Release checklist

Manual sign-off for high-risk changes. Eval results attached. Rollback plan documented.

4

Post-release: canary + monitoring

Compare canary vs baseline. Alert on drift. Auto-rollback if critical metrics fail.

📈Monitoring

Scorecards, drift & regression detection

Dashboards, alerts, and correlation with business outcomes. Don't let quality drift silently.

Scorecards

Dashboard: accuracy, groundedness, latency, cost by cohort. Track over time. Set SLOs.

Drift detection

Input distribution, output distribution, metric trends. Alert when drift exceeds threshold.

Regression detection

Compare current vs baseline. Statistical significance. Don't alert on noise.

Correlation with business KPI

Link eval metrics to conversion, support tickets, user satisfaction. Prove eval matters.

Before/after proof

Methodology: prove improvement

Define baseline, run A/B or shadow, document results. Avoid eval flakiness from judge model pitfalls.

Define baseline

Establish current metrics before change. No baseline = no proof of improvement.

Run A/B or shadow

Compare new vs old on same traffic. Statistical rigor: sample size, confidence intervals.

Document and version

Before/after numbers in release notes. Eval set version. Reproducible.

Avoid judge model pitfalls

Eval flakiness from judge model: temperature, prompt drift, calibration. Use multiple judges or human spot-checks.

Judge model pitfalls

Eval flakiness often comes from judge model: temperature, prompt drift, calibration. Use multiple judges, human spot-checks, or deterministic rubrics where possible.

Need an eval suite or regression gates?

We help teams build LLM eval frameworks, CI gates, and monitoring so you can ship changes without regressions. For ongoing governance and drift control, the Reliability Retainer — regression gates + monitoring operationalizes this week-to-week.