Related papers: The Alternative Annotator Test for LLM-as-a-Judge:…

Span annotation - annotating specific text features at the span level - can be used to evaluate texts where single-score metrics fail to provide actionable feedback. Until recently, span annotation was done by human annotators or fine-tuned…

Previous work adopts large language models (LLMs) as evaluators to evaluate natural language process (NLP) tasks. However, certain shortcomings, e.g., fairness, scope, and accuracy, persist for current LLM evaluators. To analyze whether…

Large Language Models (LLMs) have emerged as powerful support tools across various natural language tasks and a range of application domains. Recent studies focus on exploring their capabilities for data annotation. This paper provides a…

Textual data annotation, the process of labeling or tagging text with relevant information, is typically costly, time-consuming, and labor-intensive. While large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated their potential as direct…

Human evaluation is indispensable and inevitable for assessing the quality of texts generated by machine learning models or written by humans. However, human evaluation is very difficult to reproduce and its quality is notoriously unstable,…

The rise of large language models (LLMs) has brought a critical need for high-quality human-labeled data, particularly for processes like human feedback and evaluation. A common practice is to label data via consensus annotation over human…

There is an increasing trend towards evaluating NLP models with LLMs instead of human judgments, raising questions about the validity of these evaluations, as well as their reproducibility in the case of proprietary models. We provide…

Experimental evaluations of software engineering innovations, e.g., tools and processes, often include human-subject studies as a component of a multi-pronged strategy to obtain greater generalizability of the findings. However,…

The explainability of recommender systems has attracted significant attention in academia and industry. Many efforts have been made for explainable recommendations, yet evaluating the quality of the explanations remains a challenging and…

LLM-as-a-Judge and reward models are widely used alternatives of multiple-choice questions or human annotators for large language model (LLM) evaluation. Their efficacy shines in evaluating long-form responses, serving a critical role as…

Evaluating the quality of arguments is a crucial aspect of any system leveraging argument mining. However, it is a challenge to obtain reliable and consistent annotations regarding argument quality, as this usually requires domain-specific…

Prompting large language models (LLMs) to evaluate generated text, known as LLM-as-a-judge, has become a standard evaluation approach in natural language generation (NLG), but is primarily used as a quantitative tool, i.e. with numerical…

Human annotation of training samples is expensive, laborious, and sometimes challenging, especially for Natural Language Processing (NLP) tasks. To reduce the labeling cost and enhance the sample efficiency, Active Learning (AL) technique…

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used as automated evaluators of AI systems, including in high-stakes applications. In this role, LLMs are used to generate judgments about the quality, appropriateness, or even safety of model…

To reduce the need for human annotations, large language models (LLMs) have been proposed as judges of the quality of other candidate models. The performance of LLM judges is typically evaluated by measuring the correlation with human…

Storytelling is an integral part of human experience and plays a crucial role in social interactions. Thus, Automatic Story Evaluation (ASE) and Generation (ASG) could benefit society in multiple ways, but they are challenging tasks which…

In the context of text classification, the financial burden of annotation exercises for creating training data is a critical issue. Active learning techniques, particularly those rooted in uncertainty sampling, offer a cost-effective…

LLM use in annotation is becoming widespread, and given LLMs' overall promising performance and speed, simply "reviewing" LLM annotations in interpretive tasks can be tempting. In subjective annotation tasks with multiple plausible answers,…

The increasing volume of research paper submissions poses a significant challenge to the traditional academic peer-review system, leading to an overwhelming workload for reviewers. This study explores the potential of integrating Large…

LLMs-as-a-judge is a recently popularized method which replaces human judgements in task evaluation (Zheng et al. 2024) with automatic evaluation using LLMs. Due to widespread use of RLHF (Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback),…