Beyond One-Size-Fits-All: Inversion Learning for Highly Effective NLG Evaluation Prompts

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2504.21117v3
• Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2025 10:32:57 GMT
• Title: Beyond One-Size-Fits-All: Inversion Learning for Highly Effective NLG Evaluation Prompts
• Authors: Hanhua Hong, Chenghao Xiao, Yang Wang, Yiqi Liu, Wenge Rong, Chenghua Lin,
• Abstract summary: We propose an effective learning method that learns effective reverse mappings from model outputs back to their input instructions.<n>Our method requires only a single evaluation sample and eliminates the need for time-consuming manual prompt engineering.
• Score: 29.024391850434103
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
• Abstract: Evaluating natural language generation systems is challenging due to the diversity of valid outputs. While human evaluation is the gold standard, it suffers from inconsistencies, lack of standardisation, and demographic biases, limiting reproducibility. LLM-based evaluators offer a scalable alternative but are highly sensitive to prompt design, where small variations can lead to significant discrepancies. In this work, we propose an inversion learning method that learns effective reverse mappings from model outputs back to their input instructions, enabling the automatic generation of highly effective, model-specific evaluation prompts. Our method requires only a single evaluation sample and eliminates the need for time-consuming manual prompt engineering, thereby improving both efficiency and robustness. Our work contributes toward a new direction for more robust and efficient LLM-based evaluation.

Related papers

• InFerActive: Towards Scalable Human Evaluation of Large Language Models through Interactive Inference [14.903507875179033]
  We present InFerActive, an interactive inference system for scalable human evaluation.<n>We demonstrate that InFerActive significantly improves evaluation efficiency and enables more comprehensive assessment of model behavior.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-11T02:41:14Z)
• The LLM Already Knows: Estimating LLM-Perceived Question Difficulty via Hidden Representations [33.65540900920885]
  Estimating the difficulty of input questions as perceived by large language models (LLMs) is essential for accurate performance evaluation and adaptive inference.<n>We propose a novel approach for difficulty estimation that leverages only the hidden representations produced by the target LLM.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-16T09:38:41Z)
• Teach2Eval: An Indirect Evaluation Method for LLM by Judging How It Teaches [46.0474342507327]
  We introduce Teach2Eval, an indirect evaluation framework inspired by the Feynman Technique.<n>Our method evaluates a model's multiple abilities to teach weaker student models to perform tasks effectively.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-18T06:51:10Z)
• Multi-Agent LLM Judge: automatic personalized LLM judge design for evaluating natural language generation applications [0.0]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated impressive performance across diverse domains, yet they still encounter challenges such as insufficient domain-specific knowledge, biases, and hallucinations.<n>Traditional evaluation methods, which rely on word overlap or text embeddings, are inadequate for capturing the nuanced semantic information necessary to evaluate dynamic, open-ended text generation.<n>We propose a novel dynamic multi-agent system that automatically designs personalized LLM judges for various natural language generation applications.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-01T09:36:56Z)
• Maximizing Signal in Human-Model Preference Alignment [0.0]
  This paper argues that in cases in which end users need to agree with the decisions made by ML models, models should be trained and evaluated on data that represent their preferences.<n>We show that noise in labeling disagreement can be minimized by adhering to proven methodological best practices.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-06T19:10:57Z)
• HPSS: Heuristic Prompting Strategy Search for LLM Evaluators [81.09765876000208]
  We propose a novel automatic prompting strategy optimization method called Heuristic Prompting Strategy Search (HPSS) Inspired by the genetic algorithm, HPSS conducts an iterative search to find well-behaved prompting strategies for evaluators. Extensive experiments across four evaluation tasks demonstrate the effectiveness of HPSS.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-18T16:46:47Z)
• Auto-Prompt Generation is Not Robust: Prompt Optimization Driven by Pseudo Gradient [50.15090865963094]
  We introduce PertBench, a comprehensive benchmark dataset that includes a wide range of input perturbations.<n>Our analysis reveals substantial vulnerabilities in existing prompt generation strategies.<n>We propose PGO, a gradient-free prompt generation framework that leverages perturbation types as pseudo-gradient signals.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-24T06:05:08Z)
• Automatic Evaluation for Text-to-image Generation: Task-decomposed Framework, Distilled Training, and Meta-evaluation Benchmark [62.58869921806019]
  We propose a task decomposition evaluation framework based on GPT-4o to automatically construct a new training dataset. We design innovative training strategies to effectively distill GPT-4o's evaluation capabilities into a 7B open-source MLLM, MiniCPM-V-2.6. Experimental results demonstrate that our distilled open-source MLLM significantly outperforms the current state-of-the-art GPT-4o-base baseline.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-23T08:06:06Z)
• Closing the Loop: Learning to Generate Writing Feedback via Language Model Simulated Student Revisions [6.216542656489173]
  We propose PROF that PROduces Feedback via learning from LM simulated student revisions. We empirically test the efficacy of PROF and observe that our approach surpasses a variety of baseline methods in effectiveness of improving students' writing.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-10T15:52:48Z)
• Simplicity Prevails: Rethinking Negative Preference Optimization for LLM Unlearning [27.991291785091736]
  This work studies the problem of large language model (LLM) unlearning, aiming to remove unwanted data influences. Despite the increasing demand for unlearning, a technically-grounded optimization framework is lacking. We propose a simple yet effective unlearning optimization framework, called SimNPO, showing that simplicity' in removing the reliance on a reference model benefits unlearning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-09T17:58:12Z)
• Unconditional Truthfulness: Learning Unconditional Uncertainty of Large Language Models [104.55763564037831]
  We train a regression model that leverages attention maps, probabilities on the current generation step, and recurrently computed uncertainty scores from previously generated tokens.<n>Our evaluation shows that the proposed method is highly effective for selective generation, achieving substantial improvements over rivaling unsupervised and supervised approaches.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-20T09:42:26Z)
• Reference-Guided Verdict: LLMs-as-Judges in Automatic Evaluation of Free-Form Text [12.879551933541345]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are capable of generating human-like conversations. Conventional metrics like BLEU and ROUGE are inadequate for capturing the subtle semantics and contextual richness of such generative outputs. We propose a reference-guided verdict method that automates the evaluation process by leveraging multiple LLMs-as-judges.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-17T16:01:45Z)
• Self-Exploring Language Models: Active Preference Elicitation for Online Alignment [88.56809269990625]
  We propose a bilevel objective optimistically biased towards potentially high-reward responses to actively explore out-of-distribution regions. Our experimental results demonstrate that when fine-tuned on Zephyr-7B-SFT and Llama-3-8B-Instruct models, Self-Exploring Language Models (SELM) significantly boosts the performance on instruction-following benchmarks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-29T17:59:07Z)
• Sample-Efficient Human Evaluation of Large Language Models via Maximum Discrepancy Competition [38.822535662755314]
  We propose a sample-efficient human evaluation method for large language models (LLMs)<n>Our method automatically and adaptively selects a compact set of input instructions that maximize semantic discrepancy between pairs of LLM responses.<n>Human evaluators then perform three-alternative forced choices on these paired responses, which are aggregated into a global ranking using Elo rating.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-10T01:26:24Z)
• How Reliable Are Automatic Evaluation Methods for Instruction-Tuned LLMs? [3.1706553206969925]
  We perform a meta-evaluation of such methods and assess their reliability across a broad range of tasks. We observe that while automatic evaluation methods can approximate human ratings under specific conditions, their validity is highly context-dependent. Our findings enhance the understanding of how automatic methods should be applied and interpreted when developing and evaluating instruction-tuned LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-16T15:48:33Z)
• 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)
• Enabling Language Models to Implicitly Learn Self-Improvement [49.16868302881804]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable capabilities in open-ended text generation tasks. We propose an ImPlicit Self-ImprovemenT (PIT) framework that implicitly learns the improvement goal from human preference data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-02T04:29:40Z)
• Automatically Correcting Large Language Models: Surveying the landscape of diverse self-correction strategies [104.32199881187607]
  Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable performance across a wide array of NLP tasks. A promising approach to rectify these flaws is self-correction, where the LLM itself is prompted or guided to fix problems in its own output. This paper presents a comprehensive review of this emerging class of techniques.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-06T18:38:52Z)
• Large Language Models are Not Yet Human-Level Evaluators for Abstractive Summarization [66.08074487429477]
  We investigate the stability and reliability of large language models (LLMs) as automatic evaluators for abstractive summarization. We find that while ChatGPT and GPT-4 outperform the commonly used automatic metrics, they are not ready as human replacements.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-22T14:58:13Z)

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.