Related papers: A Dual-Perspective NLG Meta-Evaluation Framework w…

Evaluating the quality of generated text is difficult, since traditional NLG evaluation metrics, focusing more on surface form than meaning, often fail to assign appropriate scores. This is especially problematic for AMR-to-text evaluation,…

In this study, we analyze automatic evaluation metrics for Natural Language Generation (NLG), specifically task-agnostic metrics and human-aligned metrics. Task-agnostic metrics, such as Perplexity, BLEU, BERTScore, are cost-effective and…

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,…

Previous research has shown that LLMs have potential in multilingual NLG evaluation tasks. However, existing research has not fully explored the differences in the evaluation capabilities of LLMs across different languages. To this end,…

Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated great potential as evaluators of NLG systems, allowing for high-quality, reference-free, and multi-aspect assessments. However, existing LLM-based metrics suffer from two major drawbacks:…

Automatic evaluation of various text quality criteria produced by data-driven intelligent methods is very common and useful because it is cheap, fast, and usually yields repeatable results. In this paper, we present an attempt to automate…

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…

The success of Deep Learning has created a surge in interest in a wide a range of Natural Language Generation (NLG) tasks. Deep Learning has not only pushed the state of the art in several existing NLG tasks but has also facilitated…

LLM evaluation is challenging even the case of base models. In real world deployments, evaluation is further complicated by the interplay of task specific prompts and experiential context. At scale, bias evaluation is often based on short…

Evaluation practices in natural language generation (NLG) have many known flaws, but improved evaluation approaches are rarely widely adopted. This issue has become more urgent, since neural NLG models have improved to the point where they…

Despite the utility of Large Language Models (LLMs) across a wide range of tasks and scenarios, developing a method for reliably evaluating LLMs across varied contexts continues to be challenging. Modern evaluation approaches often use LLMs…

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…

In the rapidly evolving domain of Natural Language Generation (NLG) evaluation, introducing Large Language Models (LLMs) has opened new avenues for assessing generated content quality, e.g., coherence, creativity, and context relevance.…

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…

Evaluating text summarization has been a challenging task in natural language processing (NLP). Automatic metrics which heavily rely on reference summaries are not suitable in many situations, while human evaluation is time-consuming and…

The pursuit of leaderboard rankings in Large Language Models (LLMs) has created a fundamental paradox: models excel at standardized tests while failing to demonstrate genuine language understanding and adaptability. Our systematic analysis…

The quality of meeting summaries generated by natural language generation (NLG) systems is hard to measure automatically. Established metrics such as ROUGE and BERTScore have a relatively low correlation with human judgments and fail to…

Evaluation of large language model (LLM) outputs requires users to make critical judgments about the best outputs across various configurations. This process is costly and takes time given the large amounts of data. LLMs are increasingly…

The paper explores the performance of LLMs in the context of multi-dimensional analytic writing assessments, i.e. their ability to provide both scores and comments based on multiple assessment criteria. Using a corpus of literature reviews…

With generative artificial intelligence (AI), particularly large language models (LLMs), continuing to make inroads in healthcare, it is critical to supplement traditional automated evaluations with human evaluations. Understanding and…