Is GPT-4 a reliable rater? Evaluating Consistency in GPT-4 Text Ratings
This study investigates the consistency of feedback ratings generated by OpenAI's GPT-4, a state-of-the-art artificial intelligence language model, across multiple iterations, time spans and stylistic variations. The model rated responses to tasks within the Higher Education (HE) subject domain of macroeconomics in terms of their content and style. Statistical analysis was conducted in order to learn more about the interrater reliability, consistency of the ratings across iterations and the correlation between ratings in terms of content and style. The results revealed a high interrater reliability with ICC scores ranging between 0.94 and 0.99 for different timespans, suggesting that GPT-4 is capable of generating consistent ratings across repetitions with a clear prompt. Style and content ratings show a high correlation of 0.87. When applying a non-adequate style the average content ratings remained constant, while style ratings decreased, which indicates that the large language model (LLM) effectively distinguishes between these two criteria during evaluation. The prompt used in this study is furthermore presented and explained. Further research is necessary to assess the robustness and reliability of AI models in various use cases.
Code (0)
등록된 구현이 없습니다.
Tasks
Language ModelingLanguage ModellingLarge Language ModelMethods 이 논문이 사용한 방법론
Similar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
ACORN: Aspect-wise Commonsense Reasoning Explanation Evaluation
Evaluating the quality of free-text explanations is a multifaceted, subjective, and labor-intensive task. Large language models (LLMs) present an appealing alternative due to their potential for consistency, scalability,…
From Text to Insight: Leveraging Large Language Models for Performance Evaluation in Management
This study explores the potential of Large Language Models (LLMs), specifically GPT-4, to enhance objectivity in organizational task performance evaluations. Through comparative analyses across two studies, including var…
ManagementTowards Best Experiment Design for Evaluating Dialogue System Output
To overcome the limitations of automated metrics (e.g. BLEU, METEOR) for evaluating dialogue systems, researchers typically use human judgments to provide convergent evidence. While it has been demonstrated that human ju…
Dialogue Evaluationk-Rater Reliability: The Correct Unit of Reliability for Aggregated Human Annotations
Since the inception of crowdsourcing, aggregation has been a common strategy for dealing with unreliable data. Aggregate ratings are more reliable than individual ones. However, many NLP datasets that rely on aggregate r…
Word Similarityk-Rater Reliability: The Correct Unit of Reliability for Aggregated Human Annotations
Since the inception of crowdsourcing, aggregation has been a common strategy for dealing with unreliable data. Aggregate ratings are more reliable than individual ones. However, many natural language processing (NLP) app…