Are Machine Rationales (Not) Useful to Humans? Measuring and Improving Human Utility of Free-text Rationales (2023.acl-long)
Copied to clipboard
Brihi Joshi, Ziyi Liu, Sahana Ramnath, Aaron Chan, Zhewei Tong, Shaoliang Nie, Qifan Wang, Yejin Choi, Xiang Ren
| 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. |
Similar Papers
Evaluating and Characterizing Human Rationales (2020.emnlp-main)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | a new study examines how human rationales perform on automatic metrics . human-generated rationale evaluation is difficult because of its ambiguity . |
| Approach: | They propose to use model-dependent baseline performance to evaluate rationale quality . they propose to also use "fidelity curves" to reveal properties such as irrelevance and redundancy . |
| Outcome: | The proposed methods characterize rationale quality based on model retraining and using "fidelity curves" the proposed methods lead to actionable suggestions for evaluating and characterizing rationales . |
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. |
Investigating the Benefits of Free-Form Rationales (2022.findings-emnlp)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | a recent study shows that crowdsourced rationales provide additional background knowledge to models . a qualitative study shows generated rationale is not as useful for humans as crowdsourced ones . |
| Approach: | They investigate whether crowdsourced rationales provide additional background knowledge to models . they find that ECQA rationale provides additional background information to understand a decision . |
| Outcome: | The results show that ECQA rationales provide additional background knowledge to understand a decision . compared to crowdsourced rationale, generated rationale is not as useful for humans . |
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 . |
Characterizing Large Language Models as Rationalizers of Knowledge-intensive Tasks (2024.findings-acl)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Large language models generate fluent text with minimal task-specific supervision, but their ability to generate rationales for knowledge-intensive tasks (KITs) remains under-explored. |
| Approach: | They propose to generate retrieval-augmented rationalization of KIT model predictions via external knowledge guidance within a few-shot setting. |
| Outcome: | The proposed rationales were compared with crowd-sourced rationale models on factuality, sufficiency, and convincingness. |
Can Large Language Models Be an Alternative to Human Evaluations? (2023.acl-long)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Human evaluation is indispensable for assessing the quality of texts generated by machine learning models or written by humans. |
| Approach: | They propose to use large language models to evaluate unseen texts using the same instructions and samples . they also use LLMs to generate responses to questions that are used to conduct human evaluation . |
| Outcome: | The proposed model can be used to evaluate texts in open-ended story generation and adversarial attacks. |
The LLM Effect: Are Humans Truly Using LLMs, or Are They Being Influenced By Them Instead? (2024.emnlp-main)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Large language models have shown capabilities close to human performance in various analytical tasks. |
| Approach: | They investigate the efficiency and accuracy of Large Language Models in specialized tasks . they integrate LLMs with expert annotators to observe the impact of LLM suggestions . |
| Outcome: | The proposed model improves task completion speed but introduces anchoring bias . the proposed model is not suitable for open-ended analysis, but is capable of handling specialized tasks. |
Arguments that Alter Minds: LLM Rationales Sway Human (and LLM) Notions of Plausibility (2026.acl-long)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Experiments with LLMs reveal similar patterns of influence on human plausibility judgments of commonsense benchmark answers. |
| Approach: | They find that human plausibility judgments of commonsense benchmark answers are affected by implausibility arguments for or against an answer. |
| Outcome: | The results show that human judges find LLM rationales convincing and that human annotators agree on the most plausible answer when the plausibility gap is wide. |
Are Shortest Rationales the Best Explanations for Human Understanding? (2022.acl-short)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing models favor extracting the shortest possible rationales to explain model predictions . however, this assumption has yet to be validated . |
| Approach: | They propose a model that extracts rationales at any target length from text inputs . they show that rationale lengths too short do not help humans predict labels better . |
| Outcome: | The proposed model achieves compatible end-task performance and human-annotated rationale agreement compared to baseline models . |
Rationales Are Not Silver Bullets: Measuring the Impact of Rationales on Model Performance and Reliability (2025.findings-acl)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing studies have shown that training language models with rationales augmentation is beneficial, but this view does not hold consistently. |
| Approach: | They conduct comprehensive investigations to thoroughly inspect the impact of rationales on model performance and a novel perspective of model reliability. |
| Outcome: | The proposed method outperforms untrained models in several areas and provides informative regulations on the broad utilization of rationales. |