What Is Missing: Interpretable Ratings for Large Language Model Outputs
Current Large Language Model (LLM) preference learning methods such as Proximal Policy Optimization and Direct Preference Optimization learn from direct rankings or numerical ratings of model outputs, these rankings are subjective, and a single numerical rating chosen directly by a judge is a poor proxy for the quality of natural language, we introduce the What Is Missing (WIM) rating system to produce rankings from natural-language feedback, WIM integrates into existing training pipelines, can be combined with other rating techniques, and can be used as input to any preference learning method without changing the learning algorithm, to compute a WIM rating, a human or LLM judge writes feedback describing what the model output is missing, we embed the output and the feedback with a sentence embedding model and compute the cosine similarity between the resulting vectors, we empirically observe that, compared to discrete numerical ratings, WIM yields fewer ties and larger rating deltas, which improves the availability of a learning signal in pairwise preference data, we use interpretable in the following limited sense: for each scalar rating, we can inspect the judge's missing-information text that produced it, enabling qualitative debugging of the preference labels.
Code (0)
등록된 구현이 없습니다.
Similar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
How LLMs See Creativity: Zero-Shot Scoring of Visual Creativity with Interpretable Reasoning
Evaluating the originality of visual images poses enduring challenges for creativity assessment. Automated scoring using AI models has proven effective in the verbal domain, yet key questions remain about evaluating visu…
Collaborative Filtering and the Missing at Random Assumption
Rating prediction is an important application, and a popular research topic in collaborative filtering. However, both the validity of learning algorithms, and the validity of standard testing procedures rest on the assum…
Collaborative FilteringDoubly Robust Joint Learning for Recommendation on Data Missing Not at Random
In recommender systems, usually the ratings of a user to most items are missing and a critical problem is that the missing ratings are often missing not at random (MNAR) in reality. It is widely acknowledged that MNAR ra…
ImputationPredictionRecommendation SystemsAugmenting Human Evaluation with LLM Judges: How Many Human Reviews Do You Need?
Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used as automated evaluators of AI systems, including in high-stakes applications. In this role, LLMs are used to generate judgments about the quality, appropriateness, or ev…
Large Language Models as Evaluators for Scientific Synthesis
Our study explores how well the state-of-the-art Large Language Models (LLMs), like GPT-4 and Mistral, can assess the quality of scientific summaries or, more fittingly, scientific syntheses, comparing their evaluations …