Identifying Key Terms in Prompts for Relevance Evaluation with GPT Models

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2405.06931v1
• Date: Sat, 11 May 2024 06:30:13 GMT
• Title: Identifying Key Terms in Prompts for Relevance Evaluation with GPT Models
• Authors: Jaekeol Choi,
• Abstract summary: The purpose of this paper is to identify which specific terms in prompts positively or negatively impact relevance evaluation with Large Language Models. By comparing the performance of these prompts in both few-shot and zero-shot settings, we analyze the influence of specific terms in the prompts.
• Score: 1.1965844936801802
• License:
• Abstract: Relevance evaluation of a query and a passage is essential in Information Retrieval (IR). Recently, numerous studies have been conducted on tasks related to relevance judgment using Large Language Models (LLMs) such as GPT-4, demonstrating significant improvements. However, the efficacy of LLMs is considerably influenced by the design of the prompt. The purpose of this paper is to identify which specific terms in prompts positively or negatively impact relevance evaluation with LLMs. We employed two types of prompts: those used in previous research and generated automatically by LLMs. By comparing the performance of these prompts in both few-shot and zero-shot settings, we analyze the influence of specific terms in the prompts. We have observed two main findings from our study. First, we discovered that prompts using the term answerlead to more effective relevance evaluations than those using relevant. This indicates that a more direct approach, focusing on answering the query, tends to enhance performance. Second, we noted the importance of appropriately balancing the scope of relevance. While the term relevant can extend the scope too broadly, resulting in less precise evaluations, an optimal balance in defining relevance is crucial for accurate assessments. The inclusion of few-shot examples helps in more precisely defining this balance. By providing clearer contexts for the term relevance, few-shot examples contribute to refine relevance criteria. In conclusion, our study highlights the significance of carefully selecting terms in prompts for relevance evaluation with LLMs.

Related papers

• LLMs are Biased Evaluators But Not Biased for Retrieval Augmented Generation [28.61326111959728]
  Large language models (LLMs) exhibit significant biases in evaluation tasks, particularly in preferentially rating and favoring self-generated content. Our study addresses this knowledge gap by simulating two critical phases of the retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) framework. Contrary to previous findings, our results reveal no significant self-preference effect in RAG frameworks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-28T08:32:09Z)
• Best in Tau@LLMJudge: Criteria-Based Relevance Evaluation with Llama3 [5.478764356647438]
  We explore alternative methods to prompt large language models (LLMs) for assigned relevance labels. We consider various ways to aggregate criteria-level grades into a relevance label. We include an empirical evaluation of our approaches based on data from the LLMJudge challenge run in Summer 2024.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-17T21:37:08Z)
• Aggregation Artifacts in Subjective Tasks Collapse Large Language Models' Posteriors [74.04775677110179]
  In-context Learning (ICL) has become the primary method for performing natural language tasks with Large Language Models (LLMs) In this work, we examine whether this is the result of the aggregation used in corresponding datasets, where trying to combine low-agreement, disparate annotations might lead to annotation artifacts that create detrimental noise in the prompt. Our results indicate that aggregation is a confounding factor in the modeling of subjective tasks, and advocate focusing on modeling individuals instead.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-17T17:16:00Z)
• Evaluating Human Alignment and Model Faithfulness of LLM Rationale [66.75309523854476]
  We study how well large language models (LLMs) explain their generations through rationales. We show that prompting-based methods are less "faithful" than attribution-based explanations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-28T20:06:30Z)
• Iterative Utility Judgment Framework via LLMs Inspired by Relevance in Philosophy [66.95501113584541]
  Utility and topical relevance are critical measures in information retrieval. We propose an Iterative utiliTy judgmEnt fraMework to promote each step of the cycle of Retrieval-Augmented Generation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-17T07:52:42Z)
• LLM In-Context Recall is Prompt Dependent [0.0]
  A model's ability to do this significantly influences its practical efficacy and dependability in real-world applications. This study demonstrates that an LLM's recall capability is not only contingent upon the prompt's content but also may be compromised by biases in its training data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-13T01:13:59Z)
• Evaluating Interventional Reasoning Capabilities of Large Language Models [58.52919374786108]
  Large language models (LLMs) can estimate causal effects under interventions on different parts of a system. We conduct empirical analyses to evaluate whether LLMs can accurately update their knowledge of a data-generating process in response to an intervention. We create benchmarks that span diverse causal graphs (e.g., confounding, mediation) and variable types, and enable a study of intervention-based reasoning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-08T14:15:56Z)
• C-ICL: Contrastive In-context Learning for Information Extraction [54.39470114243744]
  c-ICL is a novel few-shot technique that leverages both correct and incorrect sample constructions to create in-context learning demonstrations. Our experiments on various datasets indicate that c-ICL outperforms previous few-shot in-context learning methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-17T11:28:08Z)
• Mutual Information Maximization for Effective Lip Reading [99.11600901751673]
  We propose to introduce the mutual information constraints on both the local feature's level and the global sequence's level. By combining these two advantages together, the proposed method is expected to be both discriminative and robust for effective lip reading.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-03-13T18:47:42Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.