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

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…

This work studies the challenge of aligning large language models (LLMs) with offline preference data. We focus on alignment by Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) in particular. While popular preference optimization methods…

The rapid advancement of large language models (LLMs) has led to growing interest in using synthetic data to train future models. However, this creates a self-consuming retraining loop, where models are trained on their own outputs and may…

Large language models (LLMs) often exhibit systematic preferences for certain answer choices when responding to multiple-choice questions-a behavior known as selection bias. This bias reduces the accuracy and reliability of LLM outputs,…

Aligning generative models with human preference via RLHF typically suffers from overoptimization, where an imperfectly learned reward model can misguide the generative model to output undesired responses. We investigate this problem in a…

As Generative AI (GenAI) systems see growing adoption, a key concern involves the external validity of evaluations, or the extent to which they generalize from lab-based to real-world deployment conditions. Threats to the external validity…

LLM-as-a-Judge has been widely applied to evaluate and compare different LLM alignmnet approaches (e.g., RLHF and DPO). However, concerns regarding its reliability have emerged, due to LLM judges' biases and inconsistent decision-making.…

The impressive performance of large language models (LLMs) has attracted considerable attention from the academic and industrial communities. Besides how to construct and train LLMs, how to effectively evaluate and compare the capacity of…

Existing studies on bias mitigation methods for large language models (LLMs) use diverse baselines and metrics to evaluate debiasing performance, leading to inconsistent comparisons among them. Moreover, their evaluations are mostly based…

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…

Large Language Models (LLMs) still produce gender-stereotyped language even in occupation-neutral contexts that reflect deep societal biases (Rudinger et al., 2018). To address this, prior work has proposed prompting, constrained decoding…

Large Language Models (LLMs) are trained on large corpora written by humans and demonstrate high performance on various tasks. However, as humans are susceptible to cognitive biases, which can result in irrational judgments, LLMs can also…

Large language models (LLMs) have become a standard for multilingual evaluation, yet they exhibit a severe systematic translationese bias. In this paper, translationese bias is characterized as LLMs systematically favoring…

With the increasing adoption of large language models (LLMs) in education, concerns about inherent biases in these models have gained prominence. We evaluate LLMs for bias in the personalized educational setting, specifically focusing on…

The zero-shot capability of Large Language Models (LLMs) has enabled highly flexible, reference-free metrics for various tasks, making LLM evaluators common tools in NLP. However, the robustness of these LLM evaluators remains relatively…

Verifiers--functions assigning rewards to agent behavior--have been key to AI progress in math, code, and games. However, extending gains to domains without clear-cut success criteria remains a challenge: while humans can recognize desired…

Large language models (LLMs) have become widely adopted as automated judges for evaluating AI-generated content. Despite their success, aligning LLM-based evaluations with human judgments remains challenging. While supervised fine-tuning on…

While Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) is widely used to align Large Language Models (LLMs) with human preferences, it typically assumes homogeneous preferences across users, overlooking diverse human values and minority…

LLM-as-a-Judge has emerged as a promising tool for automatically evaluating generated outputs, but its reliability is often undermined by potential biases in judgment. Existing efforts to mitigate these biases face key limitations:…

Natural language processing (NLP) has seen remarkable advancements with the development of large language models (LLMs). Despite these advancements, LLMs often produce socially biased outputs. Recent studies have mainly addressed this…