  In this work we explore recent advances in instruction-tuning language models
on a range of open instruction-following datasets. Despite recent claims that
open models can be on par with state-of-the-art proprietary models, these
claims are often accompanied by limited evaluation, making it difficult to
compare models across the board and determine the utility of various resources.
We provide a large set of instruction-tuned models from 6.7B to 65B parameters
in size, trained on 12 instruction datasets ranging from manually curated
(e.g., OpenAssistant) to synthetic and distilled (e.g., Alpaca) and
systematically evaluate them on their factual knowledge, reasoning,
multilinguality, coding, and open-ended instruction following abilities through
a collection of automatic, model-based, and human-based metrics. We further
introduce T\"ulu, our best performing instruction-tuned model suite finetuned
on a combination of high-quality open resources. Our experiments show that
different instruction-tuning datasets can uncover or enhance specific skills,
while no single dataset (or combination) provides the best performance across
all evaluations. Interestingly, we find that model and human preference-based
evaluations fail to reflect differences in model capabilities exposed by
benchmark-based evaluations, suggesting the need for the type of systemic
evaluation performed in this work. Our evaluations show that the best model in
any given evaluation reaches on average 87% of ChatGPT performance, and 73% of
GPT-4 performance, suggesting that further investment in building better base
models and instruction-tuning data is required to close the gap. We release our
instruction-tuned models, including a fully finetuned 65B T\"ulu, along with
our code, data, and evaluation framework at
https://github.com/allenai/open-instruct to facilitate future research.
