Papers by Andrew Wen
AlignBench: Benchmarking Chinese Alignment of Large Language Models (2024.acl-long)
Copied to clipboard
Xiao Liu, Xuanyu Lei, Shengyuan Wang, Yue Huang, Andrew Feng, Bosi Wen, Jiale Cheng, Pei Ke, Yifan Xu, Weng Lam Tam, Xiaohan Zhang, Lichao Sun, Xiaotao Gu, Hongning Wang, Jing Zhang, Minlie Huang, Yuxiao Dong, Jie Tang
| Challenge: | Effective evaluation of alignment for emerging Chinese LLMs is still significantly lacking, calling for real-scenario grounded, open-ended, challenging and automatic evaluations tailored for alignment. |
| Approach: | They propose a multi-dimensional benchmark for evaluating LLMs’ alignment in Chinese with 8 main categories, 683 real-scenario rooted queries and corresponding human verified references. |
| Outcome: | The benchmark uses a human-in-the-loop data curation pipeline, 683 real-scenario rooted queries and human verified references. |
FaithLM: Towards Faithful Explanations for Large Language Models (2026.eacl-long)
Copied to clipboard
Yu-Neng Chuang, Guanchu Wang, Chia-Yuan Chang, Ruixiang Tang, Shaochen Zhong, Fan Yang, Andrew Wen, Mengnan Du, Xuanting Cai, Vladimir Braverman, Xia Hu
| Challenge: | Large language models (LLMs) produce natural language explanations, but they lack faithfulness and do not reflect the evidence the model uses to decide. |
| Approach: | They propose a model-agnostic framework that evaluates and improves the faithfulness of LLM explanations without token masking or task-specific heuristics. |
| Outcome: | The proposed framework improves faithfulness of large language models without masking or heuristics. |
CritiqueLLM: Towards an Informative Critique Generation Model for Evaluation of Large Language Model Generation (2024.acl-long)
Copied to clipboard
Pei Ke, Bosi Wen, Andrew Feng, Xiao Liu, Xuanyu Lei, Jiale Cheng, Shengyuan Wang, Aohan Zeng, Yuxiao Dong, Hongning Wang, Jie Tang, Minlie Huang
| Challenge: | Existing models for NLP evaluations lack the ability to generate informative critiques in pointwise grading and pairwise comparison especially without references. |
| Approach: | They propose a method which can acquire pointwise grading critiques with pseudo references and revise these critiques via multi-path prompting to obtain informative evaluation data in different tasks and settings. |
| Outcome: | The proposed method outperforms all open-source models and even GPT-4 in system-level correlations of pointwise grading. |
ReasonerRank: Redefining Language Model Evaluation with Ground-Truth-Free Ranking Frameworks (2025.findings-acl)
Copied to clipboard
Jiamu Zhang, Jiayi Yuan, Andrew Wen, Hoang Anh Duy Le, Yu-Neng Chuang, Soo-Hyun Choi, Rui Chen, Xia Hu
| Challenge: | Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly adopted across real-world applications . traditional evaluations rely on expensive, domain-specific ground-truth labels . obtaining labeled data is expensive, time-consuming, and often requires domain expertise . |
| Approach: | They propose a ground-truth-free evaluation framework focused on reasoning consistency and instruction following. |
| Outcome: | The proposed framework outperforms existing label-free methods, including majority voting, triplet ranking, and peer-review approaches. |