HD-Eval: Aligning Large Language Model Evaluators Through Hierarchical Criteria Decomposition (2024.acl-long)
Copied to clipboard
Yuxuan Liu, Tianchi Yang, Shaohan Huang, Zihan Zhang, Haizhen Huang, Furu Wei, Weiwei Deng, Feng Sun, Qi Zhang
| Challenge: | Large language models (LLMs) are a promising alternative to expensive human evaluations. |
| Approach: | They propose a framework that iteratively aligns LLM-based evaluators with human preference . they decompose a given evaluation task into finer-grained criteria . |
| Outcome: | The proposed framework iteratively aligns LLM-based evaluators with human preference . it decomposes a given evaluation task into finer-grained criteria . the framework is efficient to train and more explainable than relying solely on prompts . |
Similar Papers
Co-Eval: Augmenting LLM-based Evaluation with Machine Metrics (2025.emnlp-main)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing LLMs suffer from biases and misalignment due to limited functional understanding and knowledge gaps. |
| Approach: | They introduce a framework that leverages a criteria planner model and optimized machine metrics to enhance the scalability and fairness of LLM-based evaluation. |
| Outcome: | The proposed framework reduces biases and improves alignment with human preferences, with gains of up to 0.324 in Spearman correlation. |
DnA-Eval: Enhancing Large Language Model Evaluation through Decomposition and Aggregation (2025.coling-main)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Large Language Models (LLMs) are scalable and economical evaluators, but how reliable they are is still under-explored. |
| Approach: | They propose a framework which breaks down the evaluation process into decomposition and aggregation stages based on pedagogical practices and provides an interpretable window for how well LLMs evaluate . |
| Outcome: | The proposed framework improves performance on a variety of meta-evaluation benchmarks by providing an interpretable window for how well LLMs evaluate . |
Aligning Black-box Language Models with Human Judgments (2025.findings-naacl)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used as automated judges to evaluate recommendation systems, search engines, and other subjective tasks. |
| Approach: | They propose a framework to align LLM judgments with individual human evaluators or their aggregated judgments without retraining or fine-tuning the LLM. |
| Outcome: | The proposed framework achieves 142% improvement in agreement across 29 tasks and exceeds inter-human agreement on four out of six tasks. |
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. |
Calibrating LLM-Based Evaluator (2024.lrec-main)
Copied to clipboard
Yuxuan Liu, Tianchi Yang, Shaohan Huang, Zihan Zhang, Haizhen Huang, Furu Wei, Weiwei Deng, Feng Sun, Qi Zhang
| Challenge: | Existing models for large language models lack the ability to calibrate their outputs towards human preference. |
| Approach: | They propose a multi-stage, gradient-free approach to calibrate an LLM-based evaluator toward human preference. |
| Outcome: | The proposed approach improves correlation with expert evaluation on multiple text quality evaluation datasets. |
Are Large Language Model-based Evaluators the Solution to Scaling Up Multilingual Evaluation? (2024.findings-eacl)
Copied to clipboard
Rishav Hada, Varun Gumma, Adrian Wynter, Harshita Diddee, Mohamed Ahmed, Monojit Choudhury, Kalika Bali, Sunayana Sitaram
| Challenge: | Large Language Models (LLMs) excel in various tasks, but their evaluation, especially in languages beyond the top 20, remains inadequate due to existing benchmarks and metrics limitations. |
| Approach: | They propose to use Large Language Models as evaluators to rank or score other models’ outputs by calibrating them against 20K human judgments across three text-generation tasks, five metrics, and eight languages. |
| Outcome: | The proposed evaluation methods can be used to improve multilingual evaluation by calibrating them against 20K human judgments across three text-generation tasks, five metrics, and eight languages. |
Towards Better Value Principles for Large Language Model Alignment: A Systematic Evaluation and Enhancement (2025.acl-long)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Large Language Models (LLMs) show remarkable performance across tasks . alignment with human values is critical for their responsible development. |
| Approach: | They propose a framework that evaluates value principles along three desirable properties . they propose supervised fine-tuning, reinforcement learning-based approaches . |
| Outcome: | The proposed framework improves value principles along the three desirable properties of LLMs. |
LLMs meet Bloom’s Taxonomy: A Cognitive View on Large Language Model Evaluations (2025.coling-main)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing evaluation approaches for Large Language Models lack a structured approach that reflects the underlying cognitive abilities required for solving the tasks. |
| Approach: | They propose a hierarchical approach to evaluation of Large Language Models that leverages Bloom’s Taxonomy to identify how well they cover the levels of Bloom’ s taxonomies. |
| Outcome: | The proposed evaluation frameworks cover the Bloom’s Taxonomy, a hierarchical framework for categorizing cognitive skills, on the most widely used benchmarks. |
StructEval: Deepen and Broaden Large Language Model Assessment via Structured Evaluation (2024.findings-acl)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Current evaluations for large language models use a single-item assessment paradigm . current evaluations struggle to discern whether a model possesses the required capabilities or merely memorizes/guesses the answers to specific questions. |
| Approach: | They propose a framework to evaluate large language models using atomic test objectives. |
| Outcome: | The proposed evaluation framework resists data contamination and reduces interference of potential biases, and sheds light on the design of future principled and trustworthy LLM evaluation protocols. |
Leveraging Large Language Models for NLG Evaluation: Advances and Challenges (2024.emnlp-main)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | introducing Large Language Models (LLMs) has opened new avenues for assessing generated content quality, e.g., coherence, creativity, and context relevance. |
| Approach: | They propose a taxonomy for organizing existing LLM-based evaluation metrics and a structured framework to understand and compare them. |
| Outcome: | The proposed taxonomy offers a framework to understand and compare LLM-based evaluation methods. |