LLM as a Scorer: The Impact of Output Order on Dialogue Evaluation
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2406.02863v1
- Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2024 02:25:10 GMT
- Title: LLM as a Scorer: The Impact of Output Order on Dialogue Evaluation
- Authors: Yi-Pei Chen, KuanChao Chu, Hideki Nakayama,
- Abstract summary: This research investigates the effect of prompt design on dialogue evaluation using large language models (LLMs)
We found that the order of presenting reasons and scores significantly influences LLMs' scoring, with a "reason-first" approach yielding more comprehensive evaluations.
- Score: 17.38671584773247
- License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
- Abstract: This research investigates the effect of prompt design on dialogue evaluation using large language models (LLMs). While LLMs are increasingly used for scoring various inputs, creating effective prompts for dialogue evaluation remains challenging due to model sensitivity and subjectivity in dialogue assessments. Our study experimented with different prompt structures, altering the sequence of output instructions and including explanatory reasons. We found that the order of presenting reasons and scores significantly influences LLMs' scoring, with a "reason-first" approach yielding more comprehensive evaluations. This insight is crucial for enhancing the accuracy and consistency of LLM-based evaluations.
Related papers
- Enhancing LLM Evaluations: The Garbling Trick [0.0]
Large language models (LLMs) become increasingly powerful, making it challenging to distinguish between models based on their performance.
We propose a general method to transform existing LLM evaluations into a series of progressively more difficult tasks.
Our results offer insights into the comparative reasoning abilities of these models, particularly highlighting distinctions between OpenAI's o1-preview and Google's gemini-pro-1.5.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-11-03T11:39:50Z) - Can LLMs Understand the Implication of Emphasized Sentences in Dialogue? [64.72966061510375]
Emphasis is a crucial component in human communication, which indicates the speaker's intention and implication beyond pure text in dialogue.
This paper introduces Emphasized-Talk, a benchmark with emphasis-annotated dialogue samples capturing the implications of emphasis.
We evaluate various Large Language Models (LLMs), both open-source and commercial, to measure their performance in understanding emphasis.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-06-16T20:41:44Z) - A Better LLM Evaluator for Text Generation: The Impact of Prompt Output Sequencing and Optimization [17.38671584773247]
This research investigates prompt designs of evaluating generated texts using large language models (LLMs)
We found that the order of presenting reasons and scores significantly influences LLMs' scoring.
An additional optimization may enhance scoring alignment if sufficient data is available.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-06-14T12:31:44Z) - Decompose and Aggregate: A Step-by-Step Interpretable Evaluation Framework [75.81096662788254]
Large Language Models (LLMs) are scalable and economical evaluators.
The question of how reliable these evaluators are has emerged as a crucial research question.
We propose Decompose and Aggregate, which breaks down the evaluation process into different stages based on pedagogical practices.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-05-24T08:12:30Z) - 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) - A Comprehensive Analysis of the Effectiveness of Large Language Models
as Automatic Dialogue Evaluators [46.939611070781794]
Large language models (LLMs) are shown to be promising substitutes for human judges.
We analyze the multi-dimensional evaluation capability of 30 recently emerged LLMs at both turn and dialogue levels.
We also probe the robustness of the LLMs in handling various adversarial perturbations at both turn and dialogue levels.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-12-24T04:50:57Z) - Exploring the Factual Consistency in Dialogue Comprehension of Large Language Models [51.75805497456226]
This work focuses on the factual consistency issue with the help of the dialogue summarization task.
Our evaluation shows that, on average, 26.8% of the summaries generated by LLMs contain factual inconsistency.
To stimulate and enhance the dialogue comprehension ability of LLMs, we propose a fine-tuning paradigm with auto-constructed multi-task data.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-11-13T09:32:12Z) - Evaluating Large Language Models at Evaluating Instruction Following [54.49567482594617]
We introduce a challenging meta-evaluation benchmark, LLMBar, designed to test the ability of an LLM evaluator in discerning instruction-following outputs.
We discover that different evaluators exhibit distinct performance on LLMBar and even the highest-scoring ones have substantial room for improvement.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-10-11T16:38:11Z)
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.