Related papers: CheckEval: A reliable LLM-as-a-Judge framework for…

Evaluating the quality of text generated by large language models (LLMs) remains a significant challenge. Traditional metrics often fail to align well with human judgments, particularly in tasks requiring creativity and nuance. In this…

Evaluating large language models (LLMs) in diverse and challenging scenarios is essential to align them with human preferences. To mitigate the prohibitive costs associated with human evaluations, utilizing a powerful LLM as a judge has…

LLM-as-a-judge approaches have emerged as a scalable solution for evaluating model behaviors, yet they rely on evaluation criteria often created by a single individual, embedding that person's assumptions, priorities, and interpretive lens.…

Significant progress has been made in automatic text evaluation with the introduction of large language models (LLMs) as evaluators. However, current sample-wise evaluation paradigm suffers from the following issues: (1) Sensitive to prompt…

Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated great potential for automating the evaluation of natural language generation. Previous frameworks of LLM-as-a-judge fall short in two ways: they either use zero-shot setting without consulting…

Checklists have emerged as a popular approach for interpretable and fine-grained evaluation, particularly with LLM-as-a-Judge. Beyond evaluation, these structured criteria can serve as signals for model alignment, reinforcement learning,…

This study introduces \textbf{InteractEval}, a framework that integrates human expertise and Large Language Models (LLMs) using the Think-Aloud (TA) method to generate attributes for checklist-based text evaluation. By combining human…

Automated text evaluation has long been a central issue in Natural Language Processing (NLP). Recently, the field has shifted toward using Large Language Models (LLMs) as evaluators-a trend known as the LLM-as-a-Judge paradigm. While…

Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly relied upon to evaluate text outputs of other LLMs, thereby influencing leaderboards and development decisions. However, concerns persist over the accuracy of these assessments and the potential…

With significant efforts in recent studies, LLM-as-a-Judge has become a cost-effective alternative to human evaluation for assessing text generation quality in a wide range of tasks. However, there still remains a reliability gap between…

Recent advancements in large language models have led to significant improvements across various tasks, including mathematical reasoning, which is used to assess models' intelligence in logical reasoning and problem-solving. Models are…

Code review is a vital but demanding aspect of software development, generating significant interest in automating review comments. Traditional evaluation methods for these comments, primarily based on text similarity, face two major…

Going beyond the prediction of numerical scores, recent research in automated essay scoring has increasingly emphasized the generation of high-quality feedback that provides justification and actionable guidance. To mitigate the high cost…

Existing evaluation metrics for natural language generation (NLG) tasks face the challenges on generalization ability and interpretability. Specifically, most of the well-performed metrics are required to train on evaluation datasets of…

Current IR evaluation is based on relevance judgments, created either manually or automatically, with decisions outsourced to Large Language Models (LLMs). We offer an alternative paradigm, that never relies on relevance judgments in any…

The era of Large Language Models (LLMs) raises new demands for automatic evaluation metrics, which should be adaptable to various application scenarios while maintaining low cost and effectiveness. Traditional metrics for automatic text…

Large language models (LLMs) are widely used as scalable evaluators of model responses in lieu of human annotators. However, imperfect sensitivity and specificity of the LLM judges induce bias in naive evaluation scores. We propose a simple…

The adoption of Large Language Models (LLMs) as automated evaluators (LLM-as-a-judge) has revealed critical inconsistencies in current evaluation frameworks. We identify two fundamental types of inconsistencies: (1) Score-Comparison…

Relevance judgments are crucial for evaluating information retrieval systems, but traditional human-annotated labels are time-consuming and expensive. As a result, many researchers turn to automatic alternatives to accelerate method…

We address a fundamental challenge in Natural Language Generation (NLG) model evaluation -- the design and evaluation of evaluation metrics. Recognizing the limitations of existing automatic metrics and noises from how current human…