Challenge: Large Language Models (LLMs) are evolving and impacting various fields . current methods for evaluation are based on fixed, domain-specific questions or rely on human input, making them unscalable.
Approach: They propose a benchmarking framework based on debates between LLMs, judged by another LLM.
Outcome: The proposed framework achieves rankings that align closely with popular rankings based on human input eliminating the need for costly crowdsourcing.

Similar Papers

A Systematic Survey and Critical Review on Evaluating Large Language Models: Challenges, Limitations, and Recommendations (2024.emnlp-main)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Large Language Models (LLMs) have gained significant attention due to their capabilities in performing diverse tasks across domains.
Approach: They review the primary challenges and limitations causing inconsistencies in evaluations . early models could generate coherent text but limited to simple tasks .
Outcome: The proposed evaluations are reproducible, reliable, and robust.
Are Large Language Model-based Evaluators the Solution to Scaling Up Multilingual Evaluation? (2024.findings-eacl)

Copied to clipboard

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.
Examining Inter-Consistency of Large Language Models Collaboration: An In-depth Analysis via Debate (2023.findings-emnlp)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Existing studies focus on inconsistency issues within a single LLM, while we explore the inter-consistencies among multiple LLMs for collaboration.
Approach: They propose a formal debate framework to examine whether LLMs can collaborate effectively to achieve a consensus for a shared goal.
Outcome: The proposed framework enables LLMs to achieve consensus in three real-world debate scenarios with real-time scenarios aligned to the LLM's goals.
Natural Language Reasoning in Large Language Models: Analysis and Evaluation (2025.findings-acl)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Argumentative reasoning presents unique challenges due to its reliance on context, implicit assumptions, and value judgments.
Approach: They propose a large-scale evaluation of LLMs' unconstrained natural language reasoning capabilities . they formalise a new strategy designed to evaluate argumentative reasoning in LLM .
Outcome: The proposed model performs better on a range of reasoning tasks than other models.
Evaluating Large Language Models with Enterprise Benchmarks (2025.naacl-industry)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Existing benchmarks lack domain-specific datasets for evaluating large language models . existing benchmarks often lack domain specific datasets, which can be difficult to convert to standardized metrics or regulatory issues.
Approach: They propose to use 25 publicly available domain-specific English benchmarks from diverse domains . they propose to combine a wide range of natural language processing tasks for holistic evaluation .
Outcome: The proposed framework includes 25 publicly available domain-specific English benchmarks from diverse enterprise domains like financial services, legal, climate, cyber security, and 2 public Japanese finance benchmarks.
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.
ArgBench: Benchmarking LLMs on Computational Argumentation Tasks (2026.findings-acl)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Argumentation skills are an essential toolkit for large language models (LLMs).
Approach: They propose a benchmark to evaluate the generalizability of five LLM families across 46 computational argumentation tasks.
Outcome: The proposed benchmark evaluates the generalizability of five LLM families across 46 computational argumentation tasks covering mining arguments, assessing perspectives, evaluating argument quality, reasoning about arguments, and generating arguments.
Navigating the Modern Evaluation Landscape: Considerations in Benchmarks and Frameworks for Large Language Models (LLMs) (2024.lrec-tutorials)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: General-purpose Language Models have changed the world of Natural Language Processing, if not the world itself.
Approach: This tutorial will lay the foundations and explain the basics of evaluation and compare traditional methods to newly developed methods.
Outcome: The tutorial assumes little familiarity with metrics, datasets, prompts and benchmarks . it will compare traditional methods to newly developed methods .
Exploring the Potential of Large Language Models in Computational Argumentation (2024.acl-long)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Argumentation is an essential tool in various domains, including law, public policy, and artificial intelligence.
Approach: They propose to evaluate LLMs on various computational argumentation tasks . they organize existing tasks into six main categories and standardize the format of 14 datasets .
Outcome: The proposed model performs well on argument mining and argument generation tasks.
Debatable Intelligence: Benchmarking LLM Judges via Debate Speech Evaluation (2025.emnlp-main)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Evaluating debate speeches requires a deep understanding of arguments at multiple levels.
Approach: They propose a benchmark task for LLM judges based on annotated debate speeches . they analyze the judgment capabilities and behavior of frontier LLMs .
Outcome: The proposed task requires a comprehensive understanding of argumentation and its arguments.

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