Related papers: Exploring the Effects of Alignment on Numerical Bi…
LLM-as-a-Judge evaluation has become a standard tool for assessing base model performance. However, characterizing performance via the naive estimator, i.e., raw judge outputs, is systematically biased. Recent work has proposed estimators…
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…
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…
Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated promising capabilities as automatic evaluators in assessing the quality of generated natural language. However, LLMs still exhibit biases in evaluation and often struggle to generate coherent…
The rapid advancements in Large Language Models (LLMs) and Large Visual-Language Models (LVLMs) have opened up new opportunities for integrating visual and linguistic modalities. However, effectively aligning these modalities remains…
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…
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…
Large language models~(LLMs) have greatly advanced the frontiers of artificial intelligence, attaining remarkable improvement in model capacity. To assess the model performance, a typical approach is to construct evaluation benchmarks for…
The evaluation of large language model (LLM) outputs is increasingly performed by other LLMs, a setup commonly known as "LLM-as-a-judge", or autograders. While autograders offer a scalable alternative to human evaluation, they have shown…
As LLMs rapidly saturate existing benchmarks, automated benchmark creation using LLMs (LLM-as-a-benchmark) -- where a model generates test inputs (LLM-as-a-testset) and evaluates outputs (LLM-as-an-evaluator) -- has gained traction as a…
Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used as automated judges to evaluate recommendation systems, search engines, and other subjective tasks, where relying on human evaluators can be costly, time-consuming, and unscalable. LLMs…
Large Language Models (LLMs) have emerged as promising solutions for a variety of medical and clinical decision support applications. However, LLMs are often subject to different types of biases, which can lead to unfair treatment of…
Aligning large language models (LLMs) with human values and intents critically involves the use of human or AI feedback. While dense feedback annotations are expensive to acquire and integrate, sparse feedback presents a structural design…
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…
We examined how model size, temperature, and prompt style affect Large Language Models' (LLMs) alignment within itself, between models, and with human in assessing clinical reasoning skills. Model size emerged as a key factor in LLM-human…
The conformity effect describes the tendency of individuals to align their responses with the majority. Studying this bias in large language models (LLMs) is crucial, as LLMs are increasingly used in various information-seeking and…
This work introduces a novel framework for evaluating LLMs' capacity to balance instruction-following with critical reasoning when presented with multiple-choice questions containing no valid answers. Through systematic evaluation across…
Current benchmarks for evaluating Large Language Models (LLMs) often do not exhibit enough writing style diversity, with many adhering primarily to standardized conventions. Such benchmarks do not fully capture the rich variety of…
LLM-as-a-judge has become a promising paradigm for using large language models (LLMs) to evaluate natural language generation (NLG), but the uncertainty of its evaluation remains underexplored. This lack of reliability may limit its…
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…