Challenge: Existing metrics for rationale evaluation focus on the association between the rationale and a label, whereas REV is more sensitive to new information in free-text rationales.
Approach: They propose a metric called REV to quantify the amount of new, label-relevant information in a rationale beyond the information already available in the input or the label.
Outcome: The proposed metric is consistent with human judgments on rationale evaluations and provides more sensitive measurements of new information in free-text rationales.

Similar Papers

Measuring Association Between Labels and Free-Text Rationales (2021.emnlp-main)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Existing models for extractive rationales do not work as well on reasoning tasks requiring free-text rationale.
Approach: They propose to use pipelines to extract rationales from input words and to use them to explain reasoning tasks.
Outcome: The proposed models exhibit desirable properties for explaining commonsense question-answering and natural language inference, indicating their potential for producing faithful free-text rationales.
RORA: Robust Free-Text Rationale Evaluation (2024.acl-long)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Existing metrics rely on degree to which rationale supports a label, but they fail to evaluate rationales that inadvertently leak the label.
Approach: They propose a RObust free-text RAtionale evaluation against label leakage that quantifies the new information supplied by a rationale to justify the label.
Outcome: The proposed evaluation outperforms existing methods in evaluating human-written, synthetic, or model-generated rationales, particularly demonstrating robustness against label leakage.
Are Machine Rationales (Not) Useful to Humans? Measuring and Improving Human Utility of Free-text Rationales (2023.acl-long)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Existing metrics like task performance of the LM generating the rationales or similarity between generated and gold rationale are not good indicators of their human utility.
Approach: They propose to use a large language model to generate rationales with better human utility by estimating its conciseness and novelty.
Outcome: The proposed model can measure human utility to a better extent by estimating its usefulness in answering similar unseen instances.
Persuasiveness of Generated Free-Text Rationales in Subjective Decisions: A Case Study on Pairwise Argument Ranking (2024.findings-emnlp)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Existing research on generating free-text rationales has focused on tasks where there is an expected factual ground truth.
Approach: They analyze generated free-text rationales in tasks with subjective answers . they find open-source LLMs generate highly persuasive rationale models .
Outcome: The proposed model outperforms closed-source models in pairwise argument ranking, a highly subjective task with potential for debate assistance.
AXCEL: Automated eXplainable Consistency Evaluation using LLMs (2024.findings-emnlp)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Large Language Models (LLMs) are widely used for various tasks but evaluating the consistency of generated text remains a challenge.
Approach: They propose a prompt-based consistency metric which provides explanations for consistency scores by providing detailed reasoning and pinpointing inconsistent text spans.
Outcome: The proposed metric outperforms state-of-the-art metrics in summarization, free text generation and data-to-text conversion tasks by 8.7% and 6.2%.
On Sample Based Explanation Methods for NLP: Faithfulness, Efficiency and Semantic Evaluation (2021.acl-long)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Existing methods for explaining "black-box" models such as Influence Functions are becoming more popular.
Approach: They propose a semantic-based evaluation metric that can better align with humans’ judgment of explanations than the widely adopted diagnostic or re-training measures.
Outcome: The proposed method can better align with humans’ judgment of explanations than diagnostic or re-training measures.
A Tutorial on Evaluation Metrics used in Natural Language Generation (2021.naacl-tutorials)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: This tutorial presents the evolution of automatic evaluation metrics to their current state along with emerging trends in this field.
Approach: This tutorial presents the evolution of automatic evaluation metrics to their current state . it aims to assess the extent of scientific progress made and identify areas/components that need improvement .
Outcome: This tutorial presents the evolution of automatic evaluation metrics to their current state along with emerging trends in this field.
A Causal Lens for Evaluating Faithfulness Metrics (2025.emnlp-main)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Large Language Models (LLMs) offer natural language explanations as an alternative to feature attribution methods for model interpretability, but they may not reflect the model’s truereasoning faithfully.
Approach: They propose a testbed framework for evaluating faithfulness metrics for natural language explanations using diagnosticity and model-editing methods.
Outcome: The proposed framework evaluates faithfulness metrics for natural language explanations on four tasks including fact-checking, analogy, object counting, and multi-hop reasoning.
Identifying Reliable Evaluation Metrics for Scientific Text Revision (2025.acl-long)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Effective revision is a critical step in scientific writing, ensuring clarity, coherence, and adherence to academic standards.
Approach: They propose to use ROUGE and BERTScore to assess revision quality . they also examine LLM-as-a-judge approaches to assess instruction-following revisions .
Outcome: The proposed method improves the accuracy of revision tasks with and without a gold reference.
On the Limitations of Reference-Free Evaluations of Generated Text (2022.emnlp-main)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: a recent study has shown that evaluation metrics which accurately estimate the quality of generated text are limited in their ability to evaluate generated text.
Approach: They argue that reference-free metrics are limited in their ability to evaluate generated text . they recommend that they be used as diagnostic tools for analyzing and understanding model behavior .
Outcome: The proposed evaluation metrics are limited in their ability to evaluate generated text . they can be optimized at test time, can be biased against models with similar outputs .

What is GenGO?

GenGO is an NLP powered publication search system. It currenctly indexes 30k+ papers from ACL Anthology, and implements multi-aspect summarization, semantic search, and more!

Information

About
Limitations