Related papers: CFMatch: Aligning Automated Answer Equivalence Eva…

As large language models (LLMs) become integral to code-related tasks, a central question emerges: Do LLMs truly understand program semantics? We introduce EquiBench, a new benchmark for evaluating LLMs through equivalence checking, i.e.,…

Large Language Model (LLM)-based applications are graduating from research prototypes to products serving millions of users, influencing how people write and consume information. A prominent example is the appearance of Answer Engines:…

Ambiguous questions are a challenge for Question Answering models, as they require answers that cover multiple interpretations of the original query. To this end, these models are required to generate long-form answers that often combine…

Question answering (QA) systems are among the most important and rapidly developing research topics in natural language processing (NLP). A reason, therefore, is that a QA system allows humans to interact more naturally with a machine,…

Existing benchmarks for evaluating mathematical reasoning in large language models (LLMs) rely primarily on competition problems, formal proofs, or artificially challenging questions -- failing to capture the nature of mathematics…

As Large Language Models (LLMs) saturate elementary benchmarks, the research frontier has shifted from generation to the reliability of automated evaluation. We demonstrate that standard "LLM-as-a-Judge" protocols suffer from a systematic…

Automated answer matching, which leverages LLMs to evaluate free-text responses by comparing them to a reference answer, shows substantial promise as a scalable and aligned alternative to human evaluation. However, its reliability requires…

Calibration measures whether a model's predicted confidence aligns with its empirical accuracy, and is central to the reliable deployment of large language models (LLMs) in high-stakes domains such as medicine and law. While much recent…

Attributed Question Answering (AQA) has attracted wide attention, but there are still several limitations in evaluating the attributions, including lacking fine-grained attribution categories, relying on manual annotations, and failing to…

To enhance Large Language Models' (LLMs) reliability, calibration is essential -- the model's assessed confidence scores should align with the actual likelihood of its responses being correct. However, current confidence elicitation methods…

To evaluate Large Language Models (LLMs) for question answering (QA), traditional methods typically focus on assessing single-turn responses to given questions. However, this approach doesn't capture the dynamic nature of human-AI…

As Large Language Models (LLMs) advance, their potential for widespread societal impact grows simultaneously. Hence, rigorous LLM evaluations are both a technical necessity and social imperative. While numerous evaluation benchmarks have…

Large language models (LLMs) have achieved strong performance on reasoning benchmarks, yet their ability to solve real-world problems requiring end-to-end workflows remains unclear. Mathematical modeling competitions provide a stringent…

Large language models (LLMs) have shown impressive results while requiring little or no direct supervision. Further, there is mounting evidence that LLMs may have potential in information-seeking scenarios. We believe the ability of an LLM…

Despite the rapid expansion of Large Language Models (LLMs) in healthcare, robust and explainable evaluation of their ability to assess clinical trial reporting according to CONSORT standards remains an open challenge. In particular,…

Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated considerable success in open-book question answering (QA), where the task requires generating answers grounded in a provided external context. A critical challenge in open-book QA is to ensure…

The rapid rise in popularity of Large Language Models (LLMs) with emerging capabilities has spurred public curiosity to evaluate and compare different LLMs, leading many researchers to propose their own LLM benchmarks. Noticing preliminary…

Non-Factoid (NF) Question Answering (QA) is challenging to evaluate due to diverse potential answers and no objective criterion. The commonly used automatic evaluation metrics like ROUGE or BERTScore cannot accurately measure semantic…

Evaluating answers from state-of-the-art large language models (LLMs) is challenging: lexical metrics miss semantic nuances, whereas "LLM-as-Judge" scoring is computationally expensive. We re-evaluate a lightweight alternative --…

Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown promise in Automated Essay Scoring (AES), but their zero-shot and few-shot performance often falls short compared to state-of-the-art models and human raters. However, fine-tuning LLMs for each…