FALTE: A Toolkit for Fine-grained Annotation for Long Text Evaluation (2022.emnlp-demos)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing tools to evaluate long text outputs are lacking in the field of NLP . human rating and error analysis remains a crucial component for any evaluation of long text generation. |
| Approach: | They propose a web-based toolkit to collect fine-grained error annotations for long texts . they use a taxonomy to identify errors and assign them to text spans . |
| Outcome: | The proposed tool can be used to evaluate the coherence of long generated summaries. |
Similar Papers
MISMATCH: Fine-grained Evaluation of Machine-generated Text with Mismatch Error Types (2023.findings-acl)
Copied to clipboard
Keerthiram Murugesan, Sarathkrishna Swaminathan, Soham Dan, Subhajit Chaudhury, Chulaka Gunasekara, Maxwell Crouse, Diwakar Mahajan, Ibrahim Abdelaziz, Achille Fokoue, Pavan Kapanipathi, Salim Roukos, Alexander Gray
| Challenge: | Existing evaluation metrics for machine text are inadequate to capture quality of text . a recent study has focused on task-specific evaluation metrics or on properties of machine-generated text based on mismatch errors . |
| Approach: | They propose a new evaluation scheme based on fine-grained mismatch errors . they propose 13 mismatch error types to guide the model for better prediction of human judgments . |
| Outcome: | The proposed evaluation scheme is based on mismatch errors in 7 NLP tasks . the mismatch error types guide the model for better prediction of human judgments . |
TGEA: An Error-Annotated Dataset and Benchmark Tasks for TextGeneration from Pretrained Language Models (2021.acl-long)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Using pretrained language models, we propose an error-annotated dataset for text generation . we use carefully selected prompt words to guide GPT-2 to generate candidate sentences . |
| Approach: | They propose an error-annotated dataset with multiple benchmark tasks for text generation from pretrained language models. |
| Outcome: | The proposed dataset covers 24 types of errors according to common sense and linguistics. |
Fine-Grained Error Analysis and Fair Evaluation of Labeled Spans (2022.lrec-1)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Annotations with incorrect label or boundaries count as two errors instead of one, despite being closer to the target annotation than false positives or false negatives. |
| Approach: | They propose an algorithm for error identification in flat and multi-level annotations and propose a procedure for calculating meaningful precision, recall, and F1-scores based on the more fine-grained error types. |
| Outcome: | The proposed procedure prevents double penalties and allows for a more detailed error analysis, providing more insight into the actual weaknesses of a system. |
Corpus Considerations for Annotator Modeling and Scaling (2024.naacl-long)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Recent trends in natural language processing and annotation tasks emphasize individual perspectives . annotator models that rely on a single ground truth may disregard valuable minority perspectives omissions . |
| Approach: | They propose a composite embedding approach to investigate annotator modeling techniques . they show that the commonly used user token model consistently outperforms more complex models . |
| Outcome: | The proposed model outperforms more complex models on a given dataset. |
SNaC: Coherence Error Detection for Narrative Summarization (2022.emnlp-main)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | SNaC framework is used to evaluate long summaries, but it fails to identify gaps in coherence . nallapati and colleagues have developed a framework for fine-grained annotations of long summarizations . |
| Approach: | They propose a narrative coherence evaluation framework for fine-grained annotations of long summaries that can be used to evaluate coherent narratives. |
| Outcome: | The proposed framework can support future work in document summarization and coherence evaluation, the authors show . |
Annotating and Detecting Fine-grained Factual Errors for Dialogue Summarization (2023.acl-long)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing work on factual inconsistency in abstractive summarization addresses this problem. |
| Approach: | They propose a dataset with fine-grained factual error annotations named DIASUMFACT and an unsupervised model named ENDERANKER. |
| Outcome: | The proposed model performs on par with the state-of-the-art models while requiring fewer resources. |
Crowd-sourcing annotation of complex NLU tasks: A case study of argumentative content annotation (D19-59)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Recent advances in machine reading and listening comprehension involve the annotation of long texts. |
| Approach: | They propose a way to perform a sentence-by-sentence annotation task with crowd annotators. |
| Outcome: | The proposed approach can be used to identify claims in a debate speech. |
ProxyQA: An Alternative Framework for Evaluating Long-Form Text Generation with Large Language Models (2024.acl-long)
Copied to clipboard
Haochen Tan, Zhijiang Guo, Zhan Shi, Lu Xu, Zhili Liu, Yunlong Feng, Xiaoguang Li, Yasheng Wang, Lifeng Shang, Qun Liu, Linqi Song
| Challenge: | Existing evaluation methods for large language models are labor-intensive and lack efficiency. |
| Approach: | They propose a framework dedicated to assessing long-text generation that includes in-depth human-curated meta-questions spanning various domains . they use a set of proxy-quests with pre-annotated answers to assess the content's quality by incorporating the generated texts as contextual background. |
| Outcome: | The proposed framework assesses the quality of long-text content by matching it with references through human evaluation or automated metrics. |
LongEval: Guidelines for Human Evaluation of Faithfulness in Long-form Summarization (2023.eacl-main)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Human evaluation is labor-intensive, expensive to scale, and difficult to design. |
| Approach: | They propose a set of guidelines for human evaluation of faithfulness in long-form summaries that address the following challenges: (1) How can we achieve high inter-annotator agreement on faithfulness scores? (2) How can our annotator minimize workload while maintaining accurate faithfulness? |
| Outcome: | The proposed framework reduces inter-annotator variance in faithfulness scores while minimizing annotator workload while maintaining accuracy. |
Exploring the Reliability of Large Language Models as Customized Evaluators for Diverse NLP Tasks (2025.coling-main)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing work uses large language models (LLMs) to evaluate natural language process tasks, but there are shortcomings in current LLMs. |
| Approach: | They examine the alignment between LLM evaluators and human annotators by comparing conventional and alignment tasks with different evaluation criteria. |
| Outcome: | The proposed models excel in general criteria, such as fluency, but face challenges with complex criteria, including numerical reasoning. |