Related papers: Multi-Stakeholder LLM Alignment: Decomposing Estim…
Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly used to assess NLP tasks due to their ability to generate human-like judgments. Single LLMs were used initially, however, recent work suggests using multiple LLMs as judges yields improved…
Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed via public-facing interfaces to interact with millions of users, each with diverse preferences. Despite this, preference tuning of LLMs predominantly relies on reward models trained…
[Context and motivation:] For realistic self-adaptive systems, multiple quality attributes need to be considered and traded off against each other. These quality attributes are commonly encoded in a utility function, for instance, a…
Majority voting and averaging are common approaches employed to resolve annotator disagreements and derive single ground truth labels from multiple annotations. However, annotators may systematically disagree with one another, often…
Large Language Models (LLMs) are traditionally viewed as black-box algorithms, therefore reducing trustworthiness and obscuring potential approaches to increasing performance on downstream tasks. In this work, we apply an effective LLM…
In the peer selection problem a group of agents must select a subset of themselves as winners for, e.g., peer-reviewed grants or prizes. Here, we take a Condorcet view of this aggregation problem, i.e., that there is a ground-truth ordering…
We study estimation and statistical inference for reward models used in aligning large language models (LLMs). A key component of LLM alignment is reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF), where humans compare pairs of…
LLM-as-a-Judge is a flexible framework for text evaluation, which allows us to obtain scores for the quality of a given text from various perspectives by changing the prompt template. Two main challenges in using LLM-as-a-Judge are…
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…
LLM serving systems typically treat user prompts as monolithic inputs, optimizing inference through decoding tricks or inter-query batching. However, many real-world prompts contain latent semantic parallelism--decomposable structures where…
The thematic fit estimation task measures semantic arguments' compatibility with a given semantic role for a given predicate. We investigate if autoregressive LLMs have consistent, expressible knowledge of event arguments' thematic fit by…
In the realm of Natural Language Processing (NLP), common approaches for handling human disagreement consist of aggregating annotators' viewpoints to establish a single ground truth. However, prior studies show that disregarding individual…
Large language models (LLMs) often generate fluent but factually incorrect outputs, known as hallucinations, which undermine their reliability in real-world applications. While uncertainty estimation has emerged as a promising strategy for…
Evaluating mathematical reasoning in LLMs is constrained by limited benchmark sizes and inherent model stochasticity, yielding high-variance accuracy estimates and unstable rankings across platforms. On difficult problems, an LLM may fail…
The rapid development of social platforms exacerbates the dissemination of misinformation, which stimulates the research in fact verification. Recent studies tend to leverage semantic features to solve this problem as a single-hop task.…
Large language models (LLMs) are currently aligned using techniques such as reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF). However, these methods use scalar rewards that can only reflect user preferences on average. Pluralistic…
Increasing use of large language models (LLMs) demand performant guardrails to ensure the safety of inputs and outputs of LLMs. When these safeguards are trained on imbalanced data, they can learn the societal biases. We present a…
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…
A standard way to evaluate the abilities of LLM involves presenting a multiple-choice question and selecting the option with the highest logit as the model's predicted answer. However, such a format for evaluating LLMs has limitations,…
Large language models (LLMs) are now widely used to evaluate the quality of text, a field commonly referred to as LLM-as-a-judge. While prior works mainly focus on point-wise and pair-wise evaluation paradigms. Rubric-based evaluation,…