Related papers: The Comparative Trap: Pairwise Comparisons Amplifi…
Large Language Models (LLMs) excel in various tasks, including personalized recommendations. Existing evaluation methods often focus on rating prediction, relying on regression errors between actual and predicted ratings. However, user…
Human evaluation of generated language through pairwise preference judgments is pervasive. However, under common scenarios, such as when generations from a model pair are very similar, or when stochastic decoding results in large variations…
Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable capabilities in handling complex dialogue tasks without requiring use case-specific fine-tuning. However, analyzing live dialogues in real-time necessitates low-latency processing…
Large Language Models are cognitively biased judges. Large Language Models (LLMs) have recently been shown to be effective as automatic evaluators with simple prompting and in-context learning. In this work, we assemble 15 LLMs of four…
LLM-as-a-judge approaches are a practical and effective way of assessing a range of text tasks. However, when using pairwise comparisons to rank a set of candidates, the computational cost scales quadratically with the number of candidates,…
Self-evaluation using large language models (LLMs) has proven valuable not only in benchmarking but also methods like reward modeling, constitutional AI, and self-refinement. But new biases are introduced due to the same LLM acting as both…
With the onset of large language models (LLMs), the performance of artificial intelligence (AI) models is becoming increasingly multi-dimensional. Accordingly, there have been several large, multi-dimensional evaluation frameworks put…
A common technique for aligning large language models (LLMs) relies on acquiring human preferences by comparing multiple generations conditioned on a fixed context. This method, however, relies solely on pairwise comparisons, where the…
Large language models (LLMs) are known to produce varying responses depending on prompt phrasing, indicating that subtle guidance in phrasing can steer their answers. However, the impact of this framing bias on LLM-based evaluation, where…
Pairwise preference data have played an important role in the alignment of large language models (LLMs). Each sample of such data consists of a prompt, two different responses to the prompt, and a binary label indicating which of the two…
Traditional alignment methods for Large Vision and Language Models (LVLMs) primarily rely on human-curated preference data. Human-generated preference data is costly; machine-generated preference data is limited in quality; and…
Recent advances in Large Language Models (LLMs) have incentivized the development of LLM-as-a-judge, an application of LLMs where they are used as judges to decide the quality of a certain piece of text given a certain context. However,…
Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used as automatic evaluators in applications such as benchmarking, reward modeling, and self-refinement. Prior work highlights a potential self-preference bias where LLMs favor their own…
To improve Multi-step Mathematical Reasoning (MsMR) of Large Language Models (LLMs), it is crucial to obtain scalable supervision from the corpus by automatically critiquing mistakes in the reasoning process of MsMR and rendering a final…
The accurate evaluation of differential treatment in language models to specific groups is critical to ensuring a positive and safe user experience. An ideal evaluation should have the properties of being robust, extendable to new groups or…
We measure LLMs' output error at pairwise text comparison, noting the probability of error in their preferences. Our method does not rely on the ground truth and supports two scenarios: (i) uniform error rate regardless of the order of…
The prevailing approach for training and evaluating paraphrase identification models is constructed as a binary classification problem: the model is given a pair of sentences, and is judged by how accurately it classifies pairs as either…
Large language models (LLMs) have shown promising abilities as cost-effective and reference-free evaluators for assessing language generation quality. In particular, pairwise LLM evaluators, which compare two generated texts and determine…
Language model benchmarks are pervasive and computationally-efficient proxies for real-world performance. However, many recent works find that benchmarks often fail to predict real utility. Towards bridging this gap, we introduce benchmark…
Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed via public-facing interfaces to interact with millions of users, each with diverse preferences. Despite this, preference tuning of LLMs predominantly relies on reward models trained…