Unifying Human and Statistical Evaluation for Natural Language Generation (N19-1)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Human evaluation captures quality but fails to capture diversity . statistical evaluation fails to catch models that plagiarize from training set . |
| Approach: | They propose a framework which evaluates both diversity and quality based on the optimal error rate of predicting whether a sentence is human-generated. |
| Outcome: | The proposed framework evaluates diversity and quality on summarization and chit-chat dialogue. |
Similar Papers
Evaluating the Evaluation of Diversity in Natural Language Generation (2021.eacl-main)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing methods for controlling diversity by tuning a “decoding parameter” affect form but not meaning. |
| Approach: | They propose a framework that measures correlation between a diversity metric and a parameter that controls some aspect of diversity in generated text. |
| Outcome: | The proposed framework outperforms existing methods in estimating diversity . it shows that humans outperformed existing methods but affect form but not meaning . |
Evaluating the Evaluation of Diversity in Commonsense Generation (2025.acl-long)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing evaluation metrics for commonsense generation are unclear on which metrics are best suited for evaluating the diversity of outputs. |
| Approach: | They propose to use a large language model to analyze commonsense generation data to determine which diversity metrics are best suited for commonsensing. |
| Outcome: | The proposed metrics outperform form-based metrics and show high correlations with the LLM-based ratings. |
All That’s ‘Human’ Is Not Gold: Evaluating Human Evaluation of Generated Text (2021.acl-long)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | evaluators distinguish between human- and machine-authored text in three domains without training . evals' accuracy improved up to 55%, but it did not significantly improve across the three domain. |
| Approach: | They examine the role untrained human evaluations play in NLG evaluation and propose ways to improve their evaluations. |
| Outcome: | The evaluators distinguished between human- and machine-authored text at random chance level without training, but their accuracy did not improve across the three domains. |
Not All Errors are Equal: Learning Text Generation Metrics using Stratified Error Synthesis (2022.findings-emnlp)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing learning metrics are limited to tasks where large human ratings are available. |
| Approach: | They propose a model-based natural language generation (NLG) evaluation metric that is highly correlated with human judgements without requiring human annotation. |
| Outcome: | The proposed metric outperforms all prior unsupervised metrics on multiple NLG tasks including translation, image captioning, and WebNLG text generation. |
Toward Human-Like Evaluation for Natural Language Generation with Error Analysis (2023.acl-long)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Pre-trained language models (PLMs) have been used to evaluate language generation tasks . pretrained error analysis can be used to refine the generated sentence toward higher confidence . |
| Approach: | They propose to combine pretrained language model based metrics with human-like error analysis to improve sentence confidence. |
| Outcome: | The proposed method outperforms top-scoring metrics in 19/25 settings. |
Curious Case of Language Generation Evaluation Metrics: A Cautionary Tale (2020.coling-main)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | a few popular metrics are still used to evaluate language generation systems despite their known limitations. |
| Approach: | They propose to use automatic metrics to evaluate language generation systems . they show that they prefer system outputs to human-authored texts . |
| Outcome: | The proposed metrics are insensitive to correct translations of rare words and can yield high scores when given a single sentence as system output for the entire test set. |
A Tutorial on Evaluation Metrics used in Natural Language Generation (2021.naacl-tutorials)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | This tutorial presents the evolution of automatic evaluation metrics to their current state along with emerging trends in this field. |
| Approach: | This tutorial presents the evolution of automatic evaluation metrics to their current state . it aims to assess the extent of scientific progress made and identify areas/components that need improvement . |
| Outcome: | This tutorial presents the evolution of automatic evaluation metrics to their current state along with emerging trends in this field. |
Towards Holistic and Automatic Evaluation of Open-Domain Dialogue Generation (2020.acl-main)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing methods of open-domain dialogue evaluation are labor-intensive and inefficient. |
| Approach: | They propose to use open-domain dialogues to evaluate different aspects of dialogues using holistic evaluation metrics. |
| Outcome: | The proposed metrics show strong correlations with human judgments. |
A Human Evaluation of AMR-to-English Generation Systems (2020.coling-main)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | a recent human evaluation of AMR generation systems is compared to automated metrics. |
| Approach: | They propose a human evaluation which collects fluency and adequacy scores and categorization of error types for AMR generation systems. |
| Outcome: | The results show that human evaluations are more nuanced than automated metrics. |
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. |