Commercially available models dominate academic leaderboards. While impressive, this has concentrated research on creating and adapting general-purpose models to improve NLP leaderboard standings for large language models. However, leaderboards collect many individual tasks and general-purpose models often underperform in specialized domains; domain-specific or adapted models yield superior results. This focus on large general-purpose models excludes many academics and draws attention away from areas where they can make important contributions. We advocate for a renewed focus on developing and evaluating domain- and task-specific models, and highlight the unique role of academics in this endeavor.

Current large language model (LLM) evaluations rely on benchmarks to assess model capabilities and their encoded knowledge. However, these evaluations cannot reveal where a model encodes its knowledge, and thus little is known about which weights contain specific information. We propose a method to statically (without forward or backward passes) locate topical knowledge in the weight space of an LLM, building on a prior insight that parameters can be decoded into interpretable tokens. If parameters can be mapped into the embedding space, it should be possible to directly search for knowledge via embedding similarity. We study the validity of this assumption across several LLMs for a variety of concepts in the financial domain and a toxicity detection setup. Our analysis yields an improved understanding of the promises and limitations of static knowledge location in real-world scenarios.