Calibrating LLM-Based Evaluator
Recent advancements in large language models (LLMs) on language modeling and emergent capabilities make them a promising reference-free evaluator of natural language generation quality, and a competent alternative to human evaluation. However, hindered by the closed-source or high computational demand to host and tune, there is a lack of practice to further calibrate an off-the-shelf LLM-based evaluator towards better human alignment. In this work, we propose AutoCalibrate, a multi-stage, gradient-free approach to automatically calibrate and align an LLM-based evaluator toward human preference. Instead of explicitly modeling human preferences, we first implicitly encompass them within a set of human labels. Then, an initial set of scoring criteria is drafted by the language model itself, leveraging in-context learning on different few-shot examples. To further calibrate this set of criteria, we select the best performers and re-draft them with self-refinement. Our experiments on multiple text quality evaluation datasets illustrate a significant improvement in correlation with expert evaluation through calibration. Our comprehensive qualitative analysis conveys insightful intuitions and observations on the essence of effective scoring criteria.
Code (1)
Tasks
In-Context LearningLanguage ModelingLanguage ModellingText GenerationMethods 이 논문이 사용한 방법론
Similar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
Calibrating the Evaluator: Does Probability Calibration Mitigate Preference Coupling in LLM Agent Feedback Loops?
When large language model (LLM) agents adapt their behavior through evaluator feedback, systematic evaluator biases propagate into the agent's learned strategy distribution - a phenomenon termed evaluator preference coup…
Are Large Language Model-based Evaluators the Solution to Scaling Up Multilingual Evaluation?
Large Language Models (LLMs) excel in various Natural Language Processing (NLP) tasks, yet their evaluation, particularly in languages beyond the top $20$, remains inadequate due to existing benchmarks and metrics limita…
Language ModelingLanguage ModellingLarge Language ModelQuestion Answering+1QQJ: Quantifying Qualitative Judgment for Scalable and Human-Aligned Evaluation of Generative AI
The rapid progress of generative artificial intelligence has exposed fundamental limitations in existing evaluation methodologies, particularly for open-ended, creative, and human-facing tasks. Traditional automatic metr…
Image Generation"I Didn't Make the Micro Decisions": Measuring, Inducing, and Exposing Goal-Level AI Contributions in Collaboration
As large language models (LLMs) increasingly shape how users form, refine, and extend their goals, attributing contributions in human-AI collaboration becomes critical for users calibrating their own reliance and for eva…
Efficient Inference for Noisy LLM-as-a-Judge Evaluation
Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used as automatic evaluators of generative AI outputs, a paradigm often referred to as "LLM-as-a-judge." In practice, LLM judges are imperfect predictions for the underlying …