LLMs for Generating and Evaluating Counterfactuals: A Comprehensive Study (2024.findings-emnlp)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown remarkable performance in NLP tasks, but their efficacy in generating high-quality CFs remains uncertain. |
| Approach: | They compare LLMs' ability to generate CFs that flip the original label and human CF's. |
| Outcome: | The proposed models generate fluent CFs, but struggle to keep the induced changes minimal. |
Similar Papers
Prompting Large Language Models for Counterfactual Generation: An Empirical Study (2024.lrec-main)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Large language models (LLMs) have made remarkable progress in a wide range of natural language understanding and generation tasks, but their ability to generate counterfactuals has not been examined systematically. |
| Approach: | They propose a framework to evaluate LLMs' ability to generate counterfactuals based on key factors including intrinsic properties and prompt design. |
| Outcome: | The proposed framework examines the strengths and weaknesses of large language models (LLMs) and identifies factors that influence their ability to generate counterfactuals. |
Parallel Universes, Parallel Languages: A Comprehensive Study on LLM-based Multilingual Counterfactual Example Generation (2026.acl-long)
Copied to clipboard
Qianli Wang, Van Bach Nguyen, Yihong Liu, Fedor Splitt, Nils Feldhus, Christin Seifert, Hinrich Schuetze, Sebastian Möller, Vera Schmitt
| Challenge: | Large language models excel at generating English counterfactuals but their effectiveness in generating multilingual counterfacts remains unclear. |
| Approach: | They conduct automatic evaluations on both directly generated and derived counterfactuals in six languages and find that cross-lingual perturbations follow common strategic principles. |
| Outcome: | The proposed models show that translation-based counterfactuals offer higher validity than their directly generated counterparts, but still fall short of matching the quality of the original English counterf actuals. |
People Make Better Edits: Measuring the Efficacy of LLM-Generated Counterfactually Augmented Data for Harmful Language Detection (2023.emnlp-main)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Past work has shown that counterfactually augmented data (CADs) can improve models' performance on out-of-domain tests. |
| Approach: | They use Polyjuice, ChatGPT, and Flan-T5 to automatically generate CADs . they find that CAD generates a model that flips the original label with minimal changes . |
| Outcome: | The proposed model improves model robustness on out-of-domain test sets and individual data points. |
LLMs as Narcissistic Evaluators: When Ego Inflates Evaluation Scores (2024.findings-acl)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing evaluation metrics for natural language generation tasks favor text generated by different LMs . human evaluation by experts is the most reliable approach, but it is costly and time-consuming . |
| Approach: | They examine whether language model-driven evaluation metrics exhibit bias toward underlying language models in the context of summarization tasks. |
| Outcome: | The proposed evaluation metrics tend to assign inflated scores to outputs generated by the very model they are based on. |
A LLM-based Ranking Method for the Evaluation of Automatic Counter-Narrative Generation (2024.findings-emnlp)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing methods for evaluating CNs are expensive, time-consuming, and subjective, but lack a universal truth and the lack of a 'universal truth' . |
| Approach: | They propose a model ranking pipeline based on pairwise comparisons of generated CNs from different models organized in a tournament-style format to improve the evaluation process. |
| Outcome: | The proposed method achieves a high correlation with human preference, with a score of 0.88, and compares chat, instruct, and base models, exploring their strengths and limitations. |
NeuroCounterfactuals: Beyond Minimal-Edit Counterfactuals for Richer Data Augmentation (2022.findings-emnlp)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing approaches to produce counterfactuals rely on small perturbations via minimal edits, resulting in simplistic changes. |
| Approach: | They propose a novel approach to produce counterfactuals that allow for larger edits and linguistic diversity while still bearing similarity to the original document. |
| Outcome: | The proposed approach outperforms existing methods for generalizing natural language models under select settings. |
Uncovering Bias in Large Vision-Language Models at Scale with Counterfactuals (2025.naacl-long)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs) have been proposed to augment LLMs with visual inputs. |
| Approach: | They propose large vision-Language Models to augment LLMs with visual inputs. |
| Outcome: | The proposed models condition generated text on both an input image and a visual prompt, enabling a variety of use cases such as visual question answering and multimodal chat. |
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. |
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. |
LLMs Don’t Know Their Own Decision Boundaries: The Unreliability of Self-Generated Counterfactual Explanations (2025.emnlp-main)
Copied to clipboard
Harry Mayne, Ryan Othniel Kearns, Yushi Yang, Andrew M. Bean, Eoin D. Delaney, Chris Russell, Adam Mahdi
| Challenge: | Existing studies on language models' ability to explain their decisions in natural language have focused on self-generated counterfactual explanations (SCEs). |
| Approach: | They evaluate whether LLMs can generate valid counterfactuals and minimal ones . authors suggest that SCEs are, at best, an ineffective explainability tool . |
| Outcome: | The proposed language models can explain their decisions in natural language, the study finds . the models can produce valid counterfactual explanations, but make small edits that fail to change predictions. |