TALEC: Teach Your LLM to Evaluate in Specific Domain with In-house Criteria by Criteria Division and Zero-shot Plus Few-shot

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2407.10999v1
• Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2024 10:02:42 GMT
• Title: TALEC: Teach Your LLM to Evaluate in Specific Domain with In-house Criteria by Criteria Division and Zero-shot Plus Few-shot
• Authors: Kaiqi Zhang, Shuai Yuan, Honghan Zhao,
• Abstract summary: We propose a model-based evaluation method: TALEC. It allows users to flexibly set their own evaluation criteria, and uses in-context learning (ICL) to teach judge model these in-house criteria. TALEC demonstrates a strong capability to accurately reflect human preferences and achieves a correlation of over 80% with human judgments.
• Score: 2.186726107112913
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: With the rapid development of large language models (LLM), the evaluation of LLM becomes increasingly important. Measuring text generation tasks such as summarization and article creation is very difficult. Especially in specific application domains (e.g., to-business or to-customer service), in-house evaluation criteria have to meet not only general standards (correctness, helpfulness and creativity, etc.) but also specific needs of customers and business security requirements at the same time, making the evaluation more difficult. So far, the evaluation of LLM in business scenarios has mainly relied on manual, which is expensive and time-consuming. In this paper, we propose a model-based evaluation method: TALEC, which allows users to flexibly set their own evaluation criteria, and uses in-context learning (ICL) to teach judge model these in-house criteria. In addition, we try combining zero-shot and few-shot to make the judge model focus on more information. We also propose a prompt paradigm and an engineering approach to adjust and iterate the shots ,helping judge model to better understand the complex criteria. We then compare fine-tuning with ICL, finding that fine-tuning can be replaced by ICL. TALEC demonstrates a strong capability to accurately reflect human preferences and achieves a correlation of over 80% with human judgments, outperforming even the inter-human correlation in some tasks. The code is released in https://github.com/zlkqz/auto_eval

Related papers

• Unveiling Context-Aware Criteria in Self-Assessing LLMs [28.156979106994537]
  We propose a novel Self-Assessing LLM framework that integrates Context-Aware Criteria (SALC) with dynamic knowledge tailored to each evaluation instance. Empirical evaluations demonstrate that our approach significantly outperforms existing baseline evaluation frameworks. Our method also exhibits a improvement in LC Win-Rate in AlpacaEval2 leaderboard up to a 12% when employed for preference data generation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-28T21:18:49Z)
• CompassJudger-1: All-in-one Judge Model Helps Model Evaluation and Evolution [74.41064280094064]
  textbfJudger-1 is the first open-source textbfall-in-one judge LLM. CompassJudger-1 is a general-purpose LLM that demonstrates remarkable versatility. textbfJudgerBench is a new benchmark that encompasses various subjective evaluation tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-21T17:56:51Z)
• Who Validates the Validators? Aligning LLM-Assisted Evaluation of LLM Outputs with Human Preferences [11.23629471911503]
  EvalGen provides automated assistance to users in generating evaluation criteria and implementing assertions. A qualitative study finds overall support for EvalGen but underscores the subjectivity and iterative process of alignment. We identify a phenomenon we dub emphcriteria drift: users need criteria to grade outputs, but grading outputs helps users define criteria.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-18T15:45:27Z)
• Evaluating Generative Language Models in Information Extraction as Subjective Question Correction [49.729908337372436]
  We propose a new evaluation method, SQC-Score. Inspired by the principles in subjective question correction, we propose a new evaluation method, SQC-Score. Results on three information extraction tasks show that SQC-Score is more preferred by human annotators than the baseline metrics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-04T15:36:53Z)
• LLMCRIT: Teaching Large Language Models to Use Criteria [38.12026374220591]
  We propose a framework that enables large language models (LLMs) to use comprehensive criteria for a task in delivering natural language feedback on task execution. In particular, we present a model-in-the-loop framework that semi-automatically derives criteria from collected guidelines for different writing tasks and constructs in-context demonstrations for each criterion. The results reveal the fine-grained effects of incorporating criteria and demonstrations and provide valuable insights on how to teach LLMs to use criteria more effectively.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-02T02:25:55Z)
• CLOMO: Counterfactual Logical Modification with Large Language Models [109.60793869938534]
  We introduce a novel task, Counterfactual Logical Modification (CLOMO), and a high-quality human-annotated benchmark. In this task, LLMs must adeptly alter a given argumentative text to uphold a predetermined logical relationship. We propose an innovative evaluation metric, the Self-Evaluation Score (SES), to directly evaluate the natural language output of LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-29T08:29:54Z)
• FLASK: Fine-grained Language Model Evaluation based on Alignment Skill Sets [69.91340332545094]
  We introduce FLASK, a fine-grained evaluation protocol for both human-based and model-based evaluation. We experimentally observe that the fine-graininess of evaluation is crucial for attaining a holistic view of model performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-20T14:56:35Z)
• Bring Your Own Data! Self-Supervised Evaluation for Large Language Models [52.15056231665816]
  We propose a framework for self-supervised evaluation of Large Language Models (LLMs) We demonstrate self-supervised evaluation strategies for measuring closed-book knowledge, toxicity, and long-range context dependence. We find strong correlations between self-supervised and human-supervised evaluations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-23T17:59:09Z)
• KoLA: Carefully Benchmarking World Knowledge of Large Language Models [87.96683299084788]
  We construct a Knowledge-oriented LLM Assessment benchmark (KoLA) We mimic human cognition to form a four-level taxonomy of knowledge-related abilities, covering $19$ tasks. We use both Wikipedia, a corpus prevalently pre-trained by LLMs, along with continuously collected emerging corpora, to evaluate the capacity to handle unseen data and evolving knowledge.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-15T17:20:46Z)

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.