相关论文: Unveiling Scoring Processes: Dissecting the Differ…

Offering a promising solution to the scalability challenges associated with human evaluation, the LLM-as-a-judge paradigm is rapidly gaining traction as an approach to evaluating large language models (LLMs). However, there are still many…

The rise of large language models (LLMs) has brought a critical need for high-quality human-labeled data, particularly for processes like human feedback and evaluation. A common practice is to label data via consensus annotation over human…

The field of artificial intelligence (AI) alignment aims to investigate whether AI technologies align with human interests and values and function in a safe and ethical manner. AI alignment is particularly relevant for large language models…

Alignment with human preferences is an important evaluation aspect of LLMs, requiring them to be helpful, honest, safe, and to precisely follow human instructions. Evaluating large language models' (LLMs) alignment typically involves…

The advent of AI driven large language models (LLMs) have stirred discussions about their role in qualitative research. Some view these as tools to enrich human understanding, while others perceive them as threats to the core values of the…

Despite growing interest in using Large Language Models (LLMs) for educational assessment, it remains unclear how closely they align with human scoring. We present a systematic evaluation of instruction-tuned LLMs across three open…

Providing timely and individualised feedback on handwritten student work is highly beneficial for learning but difficult to achieve at scale. This challenge has become more pressing as generative AI undermines the reliability of take-home…

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…

Assessing writing in large classes for formal or informal learners presents a significant challenge. Consequently, most large classes, particularly in science, rely on objective assessment tools such as multiple-choice quizzes, which have a…

In the present study, we investigate and compare reasoning in large language models (LLM) and humans using a selection of cognitive psychology tools traditionally dedicated to the study of (bounded) rationality. To do so, we presented to…

This research investigates prompt designs of evaluating generated texts using large language models (LLMs). While LLMs are increasingly used for scoring various inputs, creating effective prompts for open-ended text evaluation remains…

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly evaluated and sometimes trained using automated graders such as LLM-as-judges that output scalar scores or preferences. While convenient, these approaches are often opaque: a single score rarely…

As artificial intelligence (AI) systems, particularly large language models (LLMs), become increasingly integrated into decision-making processes, the ability to trust their outputs is crucial. To earn human trust, LLMs must be well…

Automated short-answer scoring lags other LLM applications. We meta-analyze 890 culminating results across a systematic review of LLM short-answer scoring studies, modeling the traditional effect size of Quadratic Weighted Kappa (QWK) with…

Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly explored for educational tasks such as grading, yet their alignment with human evaluation in real classrooms remains underexamined. In this study, we investigate the feasibility of using an LLM…

Span annotation - annotating specific text features at the span level - can be used to evaluate texts where single-score metrics fail to provide actionable feedback. Until recently, span annotation was done by human annotators or fine-tuned…

We study how well large language models (LLMs) explain their generations through rationales -- a set of tokens extracted from the input text that reflect the decision-making process of LLMs. Specifically, we systematically study rationales…

Autoraters, also referred to as LLM-as-judges, are increasingly used for evaluation and automated content moderation. However, there is limited statistical analysis of how modifications in a rubric presented to both humans and autoraters…

Rubric-based text evaluation increasingly uses large language models (LLMs) as scalable judges, but aligning frozen black-box models with human scoring standards remains challenging. We formulate this challenge as a criteria-transfer…

Large Language Models (LLMs) challenge the validity of traditional open-ended assessments by blurring the lines of authorship. While recent research has focused on the accuracy of automated scoring (AES), these static approaches fail to…