Benchmark suites assess model capability on controlled tasks; large-scale conversation corpora capture naturalistic use without user feedback; and in-interface feedback mechanisms record satisfaction without task purpose. Together, they leave a critical gap in LLM evaluation: no existing infrastructure routinely links interaction trajectories to user-defined outcomes. We introduce MonitrLLM, open-source infrastructure for community-centered LLM evaluations that links full conversation transcripts to user-reported task intent and outcome assessments, treating all three as primary evaluative signals rather than optional metadata. To demonstrate the value of this approach, we conducted a two-week feasibility pilot with 26 college students using ChatGPT, collecting 206 evaluation reports with full conversation transcripts. The findings from our pilot demonstrate the value of connecting conversation trajectories with user-reported outcomes. For instance, despite reporting high average satisfaction (4.19/5) with their LLM interactions, participants also experience a substantial 23.1% failure rate on their goal tasks. We also find that multi-turn conversations are reported as failing at 2.5 times the rate of single-turn exchanges, a pattern that reframes extended interaction as a signal of difficulty rather than engagement. We conclude by discussing the value of incorporating direct user feedback with observational data for robust LLM evaluations, and the possibilities for infrastructure that enables this goal.
Victor Ojewale, Ro Encarnación, Suresh Venkatasubramanian et al.· 1 citation
It is argued that AI safety evaluations should systematically account for modality, multi-run consistency, search conditions, and response-level behaviors to better reflect how deployed AI systems behave in practice.
Ro Encarnación, Tina Behzad, Emma Lurie et al.· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.