Related papers: Quantifying and Mitigating Self-Preference Bias of…

Large Language Models (LLMs) have fundamentally transformed the field of natural language processing; however, their vulnerability to biases presents a notable obstacle that threatens both fairness and trust. This review offers an extensive…

Large Language Models (LLMs) are rapidly surpassing human knowledge in many domains. While improving these models traditionally relies on costly human data, recent self-rewarding mechanisms (Yuan et al., 2024) have shown that LLMs can…

Validating evaluation metrics for NLG typically relies on expensive and time-consuming human annotations, which predominantly exist only for English datasets. We propose \textit{LLM as a Meta-Judge}, a scalable framework that utilizes LLMs…

Large language models are increasingly used as judges (LLM-as-a-judge) to evaluate model outputs at scale, but their assessments often diverge systematically from human judgments. We present Bridge, a unified statistical framework that…

Multiple Choice Question (MCQ) answering is a widely used method for evaluating the performance of Large Language Models (LLMs). However, LLMs often exhibit selection bias in MCQ tasks, where their choices are influenced by factors like…

Predictive models often reinforce biases which were originally embedded in their training data, through skewed decisions. In such cases, mitigation methods are critical to ensure that, regardless of the prevailing disparities, model…

A Large Language Model (LLM) as judge evaluates the quality of victim Machine Learning (ML) models, specifically LLMs, by analyzing their outputs. An LLM as judge is the combination of one model and one specifically engineered judge prompt…

This work explores the role of prompt design and judge selection in LLM-as-a-Judge evaluations of free text legal question answering. We examine whether automatic task prompt optimization improves over human-centered design, whether…

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…

Recent research shows that pre-trained language models (PLMs) suffer from "prompt bias" in factual knowledge extraction, i.e., prompts tend to introduce biases toward specific labels. Prompt bias presents a significant challenge in…

Large language models (LLMs) have recently shown great advances in a variety of tasks, including natural language understanding and generation. However, their use in high-stakes decision-making scenarios is still limited due to the…

The performance of large language models (LLMs) is closely linked to their underlying size, leading to ever-growing networks and hence slower inference. Speculative decoding has been proposed as a technique to accelerate autoregressive…

Evaluating large language models typically relies on human-authored benchmarks, reference answers, and human or single-model judgments, approaches that scale poorly, become quickly outdated, and mismatch open-world deployments that depend…

As Large Language Model (LLM) capabilities advance, the demand for high-quality annotation of exponentially increasing text corpora has outpaced human capacity, leading to the widespread adoption of LLMs in automatic evaluation and…

Multi-label learning often requires identifying all relevant labels for training instances, but collecting full label annotations is costly and labor-intensive. In many datasets, only a single positive label is annotated per training…

We explore the internal mechanisms of how bias emerges in large language models (LLMs) when provided with ambiguous comparative prompts: inputs that compare or enforce choosing between two or more entities without providing clear context…

We present the first systematic evaluation examining format bias in performance of large language models (LLMs). Our approach distinguishes between two categories of an evaluation metric under format constraints to reliably and accurately…

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…

Automatic evaluation of generated textual content presents an ongoing challenge within the field of NLP. Given the impressive capabilities of modern language models (LMs) across diverse NLP tasks, there is a growing trend to employ these…

Accurate and consistent evaluation is crucial for decision-making across numerous fields, yet it remains a challenging task due to inherent subjectivity, variability, and scale. Large Language Models (LLMs) have achieved remarkable success…