Papers by Ji Yong Cho
Mind the Blind Spots: A Focus-Level Evaluation Framework for LLM Reviews (2025.emnlp-main)
Copied to clipboard
Hyungyu Shin, Jingyu Tang, Yoonjoo Lee, Nayoung Kim, Hyunseung Lim, Ji Yong Cho, Hwajung Hong, Moontae Lee, Juho Kim
| Challenge: | Large Language Models (LLMs) can automatically draft reviews, but determining whether they are trustworthy requires systematic evaluation. |
| Approach: | They propose an automatic focus-level evaluation pipeline based on two sets of facets . authors evaluated LLM reviews at surface-level or content-level . |
| Outcome: | The proposed framework enables automatic evaluation of paper reviews based on two sets of facets . the framework compared open review paper reviews with human experts on validity, clarity, novelty . |
Learning to Explore and Select for Coverage-Conditioned Retrieval-Augmented Generation (2025.findings-naacl)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Recent advances of large language models (LLMs) have enabled them to provide long and detailed responses by leveraging their parametric knowledge. |
| Approach: | They introduce a dataset of 10K hierarchical sets of information-seeking subqueries that define structured boundaries for outline creation and evaluation in C2 scenarios. |
| Outcome: | The proposed model generates higher-quality outlines that better fulfill diverse user needs when trained with alignment techniques like DPO. |
The BiGGen Bench: A Principled Benchmark for Fine-grained Evaluation of Language Models with Language Models (2025.naacl-long)
Copied to clipboard
Seungone Kim, Juyoung Suk, Ji Yong Cho, Shayne Longpre, Chaeeun Kim, Dongkeun Yoon, Guijin Son, Yejin Cho, Sheikh Shafayat, Jinheon Baek, Sue Hyun Park, Hyeonbin Hwang, Jinkyung Jo, Hyowon Cho, Haebin Shin, Seongyun Lee, Hanseok Oh, Noah Lee, Namgyu Ho, Se June Joo, Miyoung Ko, Yoonjoo Lee, Hyungjoo Chae, Jamin Shin, Joel Jang, Seonghyeon Ye, Bill Yuchen Lin, Sean Welleck, Graham Neubig, Moontae Lee, Kyungjae Lee, Minjoon Seo
| Challenge: | a recent study evaluated language models using abstract evaluation criteria that lack the flexibility and granularity of human assessment. |
| Approach: | They propose a benchmark to evaluate nine distinct language models' capabilities . they use instance-specific evaluation criteria to mirror human evaluation . |
| Outcome: | The proposed benchmark evaluates nine distinct capabilities of language models across 77 tasks. |