Related papers: Query-Document Dense Vectors for LLM Relevance Jud…
Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used to assign document relevance labels in information retrieval pipelines, especially in domains lacking human-labeled data. However, different models often disagree on borderline cases,…
Using Large Language Models (LLMs) for relevance assessments offers promising opportunities to improve Information Retrieval (IR), Natural Language Processing (NLP), and related fields. Indeed, LLMs hold the promise of allowing IR…
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…
Offline evaluation of search systems depends on test collections. These benchmarks provide the researchers with a corpus of documents, topics and relevance judgements indicating which documents are relevant for each topic. While test…
Relevance judgments are central to the evaluation of Information Retrieval (IR) systems, but obtaining them from human annotators is costly and time-consuming. Large Language Models (LLMs) have recently been proposed as automated assessors,…
Using large language models (LLMs) to annotate relevance is an increasingly important technique in the information retrieval community. While some studies demonstrate that LLMs can achieve high user agreement with ground truth (human)…
Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly used to automate relevance judgments for information retrieval (IR) tasks, often demonstrating agreement with human labels that approaches inter-human agreement. To assess the robustness and…
Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in both academic and industry settings to automate the evaluation of information seeking systems, particularly by generating graded relevance judgments. Previous work on LLM-based…
Cranfield-style retrieval evaluations with too few or too many relevant documents or with low inter-assessor agreement on relevance can reduce the reliability of observations. In evaluations with human assessors, information needs are often…
Determining which legal cases are relevant to a given query involves navigating lengthy texts and applying nuanced legal reasoning. Traditionally, this task has demanded significant time and domain expertise to identify key Legal Facts and…
A good deal of recent research has focused on how Large Language Models (LLMs) may be used as judges in place of humans to evaluate the quality of the output produced by various text / image processing systems. Within this broader context,…
Incomplete relevance judgments limit the re-usability of test collections. When new systems are compared against previous systems used to build the pool of judged documents, they often do so at a disadvantage due to the ``holes'' in test…
Manual relevance judgements in Information Retrieval are costly and require expertise, driving interest in using Large Language Models (LLMs) for automatic assessment. While LLMs have shown promise in general web search scenarios, their…
Unsupervised methods are widely used to induce latent semantic structure from large text collections, yet their outputs often contain incoherent, redundant, or poorly grounded clusters that are difficult to validate without labeled data. We…
When asked, large language models (LLMs) like ChatGPT claim that they can assist with relevance judgments but it is not clear whether automated judgments can reliably be used in evaluations of retrieval systems. In this perspectives paper,…
Human relevance assessment is time-consuming and cognitively intensive, limiting the scalability of Information Retrieval evaluation. This has led to growing interest in using large language models (LLMs) as proxies for human judges.…
The effective training and evaluation of retrieval systems require a substantial amount of relevance judgments, which are traditionally collected from human assessors -- a process that is both costly and time-consuming. Large Language…
Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly used to evaluate information retrieval (IR) systems, generating relevance judgments traditionally made by human assessors. Recent empirical studies suggest that LLM-based evaluations often align…
Unjudged documents or holes in information retrieval benchmarks are considered non-relevant in evaluation, yielding no gains in measuring effectiveness. However, these missing judgments may inadvertently introduce biases into the evaluation…
The LLMJudge challenge is organized as part of the LLM4Eval workshop at SIGIR 2024. Test collections are essential for evaluating information retrieval (IR) systems. The evaluation and tuning of a search system is largely based on relevance…