Evals And Observability hard
Your offline eval score has held steady at 88 for three months on a golden set built at launch. Over the same period, the user retry rate climbed from 8% to 14%. No model or prompt changes shipped. What is the most likely explanation, and what is the right response?
- A Latency has regressed and users retry slow responses; answer quality is fine because the offline eval score has stayed flat.
- B User inputs have drifted away from the golden set. Cluster recent queries, compare them to eval coverage, and add new cases.
- C The provider silently changed model weights behind the endpoint; pin a model version and the retry rate will return to baseline.
- D Retry rate is a noisy, lagging signal; wait for the offline score to move before acting, since it is the more reliable quality gate.
Answer: B. User inputs have drifted away from the golden set. Cluster recent queries, compare them to eval coverage, and add new cases.
A static golden set only measures the traffic it was sampled from. When the **input distribution drifts**, offline scores stay flat while online metrics degrade. Refreshing the set from clustered production queries costs ongoing labeling effort but keeps the gate representative. Waiting for the offline score (D) gets the direction of trust backwards: online metrics are the ground truth, and offline evals are a proxy that is only reliable while the eval set matches real traffic.
One system design question a day, with spaced repetition so the ones you miss come back.
Get the appRelated questions
- In one release, a RAG assistant got a new embedding model and a new chunking strategy, and the end-to-end judge score dropped 6 points. The team only tracks the end-to-end score and has spent a week tweaking the generation prompt with no recovery. What is the best next step?
- Over two months, your team iterated through 40 prompt versions, each tuned against the same 150-case golden set. The offline score rose from 72 to 91. Online task completion and retry rate have not changed. What is the most likely problem, and what is the fix?
- A prompt change produced an impressive answer in a live demo for leadership. The PM wants to ship it today. What should you do?
- You plan to replace human graders with an LLM judge for your answer-quality eval. Before trusting its scores in a CI gate, what should you do first?
- After you swap to a smaller model, p95 latency falls from 900 ms to 350 ms and the ops dashboard is all green. Leadership asks whether answer quality is still fine. What is the right response?
- Your CI gate fails any prompt change that drops the score 3 or more points on a 100-point rubric over 60 cases. Production generates at temperature 0.7. Running the eval twice on the same commit gives scores that differ by up to 4 points, and engineers have started rerunning failed gates until they pass. How do you fix the gate?