AttributionBench: How Hard is Automatic Attribution Evaluation? (2024.findings-acl)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | generative search engines enhance the reliability of large language model responses by providing cited evidence. |
| Approach: | They propose to use a benchmark to evaluate whether a large language model supports the generated responses or not . |
| Outcome: | The proposed benchmark shows that even a fine-tuned GPT-3.5 only achieves around 80% macro-F1 under a binary classification formulation. |
Similar Papers
Automatic Evaluation of Attribution by Large Language Models (2023.findings-emnlp)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Generative large language models (LLMs) incorporate external references to generate and support claims. however, evaluating the attribution remains an open problem. |
| Approach: | They investigate automatic evaluation of attribution given by large language models . they define different types of attributed errors and then explore two approaches . |
| Outcome: | The proposed methods highlight promising signals and challenges. |
Attribution, Citation, and Quotation: A Survey of Evidence-based Text Generation with Large Language Models (2026.acl-long)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Recent advances in large language models have raised concerns about reliability and trustworthiness of the models. |
| Approach: | They analyze 134 papers and introduce a taxonomy of evidence-based text generation with LLMs. |
| Outcome: | The proposed methods highlight open challenges and outline promising directions for future work. |
Diagnosing Failures in Large Language Models’ Answers: Integrating Error Attribution into Evaluation Framework (2025.findings-acl)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing evaluation models lack error attribution capability due to their proprietary nature. |
| Approach: | They propose a misattribution framework with 6 primary and 15 secondary categories to facilitate in-depth analysis. |
| Outcome: | The proposed framework is based on a dataset specifically designed for error attribution, along with the corresponding scores and feedback. |
LLM-Powered Benchmark Factory: Reliable, Generic, and Efficient (2026.acl-long)
Copied to clipboard
Peiwen Yuan, Shaoxiong Feng, Yiwei Li, Xinglin Wang, Yueqi Zhang, Jiayi Shi, Chuyi Tan, Boyuan Pan, Yao Hu, Kan Li
| Challenge: | Using generic and efficient benchmark generators, human annotators are limited by inefficiency . current benchmark generator methods rely on seed signals, leading to long cycles and high costs . |
| Approach: | They propose a framework to evaluate LLMs as generic benchmark generators and integrate them as BenchMaker. |
| Outcome: | The proposed framework achieves comparable performance to human-annotated benchmarks on most metrics. |
CiteEval: Principle-Driven Citation Evaluation for Source Attribution (2025.acl-long)
Copied to clipboard
Yumo Xu, Peng Qi, Jifan Chen, Kunlun Liu, Rujun Han, Lan Liu, Bonan Min, Vittorio Castelli, Arshit Gupta, Zhiguo Wang
| Challenge: | Current evaluation frameworks rely on NLI to assess binary or ternary support from cited sources, which is suboptimal for citation evaluation. |
| Approach: | They propose a citation evaluation framework based on fine-grained citation ratings within a broad context and construct a multi-domain benchmark with high-quality human annotations. |
| Outcome: | The proposed framework provides a high-quality human annotation benchmark and a suite of model-based metrics that exhibit strong correlation with human judgments. |
TURINGBENCH: A Benchmark Environment for Turing Test in the Age of Neural Text Generation (2021.findings-emnlp)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Recent advances in generative language models have enabled machines to generate realistic texts. |
| Approach: | They propose a benchmark environment to test the 'Turing Test' problem for neural text generation methods. |
| Outcome: | The proposed benchmark environment is based on 200K human- or machine-generated samples across 20 labels Human, GPT-1, GTP-2_small, GTT-2_medium, GPG-2_large, GGT-2_PyTorch, GGP-3, GROVER_base, griover_large and GRover_mega. |
RubricBench: Aligning Model-Generated Rubrics with Human Standards (2026.acl-long)
Copied to clipboard
Junyi Zhou, Qiyuan Zhang, Yufei Wang, Fuyuan Lyu, Yidong Ming, Can Xu, Qingfeng Sun, Kai Zheng, Peng Kang, Xue Liu, Chen Ma
| Challenge: | Existing benchmarks lack discriminative complexity and ground-truth rubric annotations required for rigorous evaluation. |
| Approach: | They propose a curated benchmark with 1,147 pairwise comparisons to assess the reliability of rubric-based evaluation. |
| Outcome: | The proposed benchmarks show that they support diverse domains, exhibit discriminative ability, provide high-quality annotations, and include human-authored rubrics. |
Factcheck-Bench: Fine-Grained Evaluation Benchmark for Automatic Fact-checkers (2024.findings-emnlp)
Copied to clipboard
Yuxia Wang, Revanth Gangi Reddy, Zain Mujahid, Arnav Arora, Aleksandr Rubashevskii, Jiahui Geng, Osama Mohammed Afzal, Liangming Pan, Nadav Borenstein, Aditya Pillai, Isabelle Augenstein, Iryna Gurevych, Preslav Nakov
| Challenge: | Large language models generate naturally sounding answers over a broad range of human inquiries, but they often generate answers that contradict real-world facts. |
| Approach: | They propose a framework for annotating and evaluating the factuality of large language models . they propose 'factcheck-bench' which provides a multi-stage annotation scheme . |
| Outcome: | The proposed framework outperforms several popular LLM fact-checkers in claim, sentence, and document levels. |
Attribute or Abstain: Large Language Models as Long Document Assistants (2024.emnlp-main)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing approaches to attribution have only been evaluated in RAG settings, where initial retrieval confounds performance. |
| Approach: | They propose to use a benchmark to evaluate attribution on long document tasks . they find that citations and additional retrieval perform best for large models . |
| Outcome: | The proposed approach performs best on large and fine-tuned models, while additional retrieval can help for small, prompted models. |
CodeJudgeBench: Benchmarking LLM-as-a-Judge for Coding Tasks (2026.acl-long)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly used to judge code, but their reliability remains poorly understood. |
| Approach: | They propose a benchmark to evaluate Large Language Models as code judges . they find that small reasoning models outperform larger non-reasoning models . |
| Outcome: | The proposed benchmark evaluates LLM-as-a-Judge models across three coding tasks. |