Fetching the paper…
Reading the bibliography…
Human evaluation of generated language through pairwise preference judgments is pervasive.
Bleu: a method for automatic evaluation of machine translation
Kishore Papineni, Salim Roukos, Todd Ward, and Wei-Jing Zhu. 2002 · 2002
Earlier work this paper cites.
ROUGE: A package for automatic evaluation of summaries
Chin-Yew Lin. 2004 · 2004
Earlier work this paper cites.
Abstractive text summarization using sequence-to-sequence RNNs and beyond
Ramesh Nallapati, Bowen Zhou, Cicero dos Santos, Çağlar Gulçehre, and Bing Xiang. 2016 · 2016
Earlier work this paper cites.
Agreement is overrated: A plea for correlation to assess human evaluation reliability
Jacopo Amidei, Paul Piwek, and Alistair Willis. 2019 · 2019
Earlier work this paper cites.
Findings of the 2019 conference on machine translation (WMT19)
Loïc Barrault, Ondřej Bojar, Marta R. Costa-jussà, Christian Federmann, Mark Fishel, Yvette Graham, Barry Haddow, Matthias Huck, Philipp Koehn, Shervin Malmasi, Christof Monz, Mathias Müller, Santanu Pal, Matt Post, and Marcos Zampieri. 2019 · 2019
Earlier work this paper cites.
Abductive commonsense reasoning
Chandra Bhagavatula, Ronan Le Bras, Chaitanya Malaviya, Keisuke Sakaguchi, Ari Holtzman, Hannah Rashkin, Doug Downey, Wen-tau Yih, and Yejin Choi. 2019 · 2019
Earlier work this paper cites.
SAMSum corpus: A human-annotated dialogue dataset for abstractive summarization
Bogdan Gliwa, Iwona Mochol, Maciej Biesek, and Aleksander Wawer. 2019 · 2019
Earlier work this paper cites.
How to compare summarizers without target length? pitfalls, solutions and re-examination of the neural summarization literature
Simeng Sun, Ori Shapira, Ido Dagan, and Ani Nenkova. 2019 · 2019
Earlier work this paper cites.
Bertscore: Evaluating text generation with bert
Tianyi Zhang, Varsha Kishore, Felix Wu, Kilian Q Weinberger, and Yoav Artzi. 2019 · 2019
Earlier work this paper cites.
Adversarial filters of dataset biases
Ronan Le Bras, Swabha Swayamdipta, Chandra Bhagavatula, Rowan Zellers, Matthew Peters, Ashish Sabharwal, and Yejin Choi. 2020 · 2020
Earlier work this paper cites.
BiSECT: Learning to split and rephrase sentences with bitexts
Joongwon Kim, Mounica Maddela, Reno Kriz, Wei Xu, and Chris Callison-Burch. 2021 · 2021
Earlier work this paper cites.
On releasing annotator-level labels and information in datasets
Vinodkumar Prabhakaran, Aida Mostafazadeh Davani, and Mark Diaz. 2021 · 2021
Earlier work this paper cites.
Evaluation examples are not equally informative: How should that change NLP leaderboards?
Pedro Rodriguez, Joe Barrow, Alexander Miserlis Hoyle, John P. Lalor, Robin Jia, and Jordan Boyd-Graber. 2021 · 2021
Earlier work this paper cites.
Comparing test sets with item response theory
Clara Vania, Phu Mon Htut, William Huang, Dhara Mungra, Richard Yuanzhe Pang, Jason Phang, Haokun Liu, Kyunghyun Cho, and Samuel R. Bowman. 2021 · 2021
Cited alongside, same era.
The authenticity gap in human evaluation
Kawin Ethayarajh and Dan Jurafsky. 2022 · 2022
Cited alongside, same era.
Repairing the cracked foundation: A survey of obstacles in evaluation practices for generated text
Sebastian Gehrmann, Elizabeth Clark, and Thibault Sellam. 2022 · 2022
Cited alongside, same era.
News summarization and evaluation in the era of gpt-3
Tanya Goyal, Junyi Jessy Li, and Greg Durrett. 2022 · 2022
Cited alongside, same era.
On the limitations of dataset balancing: The lost battle against spurious correlations
Roy Schwartz and Gabriel Stanovsky. 2022 · 2022
Cited alongside, same era.
Large language models are not fair evaluators
Peiyi Wang, Lei Li, Liang Chen, Zefan Cai, Dawei Zhu, Binghuai Lin, Yunbo Cao, Qi Liu, Tianyu Liu, and Zhifang Sui. 2023 · 2023
Later among the works it cites.
Style over substance: Evaluation biases for large language models
Minghao Wu and Alham Fikri Aji. 2023 · 2023
Later among the works it cites.
Evaluating large language models at evaluating instruction following
Zhiyuan Zeng, Jiatong Yu, Tianyu Gao, Yu Meng, Tanya Goyal, and Danqi Chen. 2023 · 2023
Later among the works it cites.
Benchmarking large language models for news summarization
Tianyi Zhang, Faisal Ladhak, Esin Durmus, Percy Liang, Kathleen McKeown, and Tatsunori B Hashimoto. 2023 · 2023
Later among the works it cites.
alphaXiv searches the wider corpus for related work and actual follow-ups.
alphaXiv is searching for related work…
Mirac Suzgun, Luke Melas-Kyriazi, and Dan Jurafsky. 2022 · 2022
Cited alongside, same era.
It’s MBR all the way down: Modern generation techniques through the lens of minimum Bayes risk
Amanda Bertsch, Alex Xie, Graham Neubig, and Matthew Gormley. 2023 · 2023
Cited alongside, same era.
What comes next? evaluating uncertainty in neural text generators against human production variability
Mario Giulianelli, Joris Baan, Wilker Aziz, Raquel Fernández, and Barbara Plank. 2023 · 2023
Cited alongside, same era.
Albert Q Jiang, Alexandre Sablayrolles, Arthur Mensch, Chris Bamford, Devendra Singh Chaplot, Diego de las Casas, Florian Bressand, Gianna Lengyel, Guillaume Lample, Lucile Saulnier, et al. 2023 · 2023
Cited alongside, same era.
G-eval: NLG evaluation using gpt-4 with better human alignment
Yang Liu, Dan Iter, Yichong Xu, Shuohang Wang, Ruochen Xu, and Chenguang Zhu. 2023 · 2023
Cited alongside, same era.
Vicuna: A cloud-native computing service for machine learning workflows
LMSys. 2023 · 2023
Cited alongside, same era.
The flan collection: Designing data and methods for effective instruction tuning
Shayne Longpre, Le Hou, Tu Vu, Albert Webson, Hyung Won Chung, Yi Tay, Denny Zhou, Quoc V Le, Barret Zoph, Jason Wei, et al. 2023 · 2023
Cited alongside, same era.
Shir Ashury-Tahan, Benjamin Sznajder, Leshem Choshen, Liat Ein-Dor, Eyal Shnarch, and Ariel Gera. 2024 · 2024
Closest in time.
A survey on evaluation of large language models
Yupeng Chang, Xu Wang, Jindong Wang, Yuan Wu, Linyi Yang, Kaijie Zhu, Hao Chen, Xiaoyuan Yi, Cunxiang Wang, Yidong Wang, Wei Ye, Yue Zhang, Yi Chang, Philip S. Yu, Qiang Yang, and Xing Xie. 2024 · 2024
Closest in time.
Chatbot arena: An open platform for evaluating llms by human preference
Wei-Lin Chiang, Lianmin Zheng, Ying Sheng, Anastasios Nikolas Angelopoulos, Tianle Li, Dacheng Li, Hao Zhang, Banghua Zhu, Michael Jordan, Joseph E Gonzalez, et al. 2024 · 2024
Closest in time.
Length-controlled alpacaeval: A simple way to debias automatic evaluators
Yann Dubois, Balázs Galambosi, Percy Liang, and Tatsunori B Hashimoto. 2024 · 2024
Closest in time.
Wildbench: Benchmarking llms with challenging tasks from real users in the wild
Bill Yuchen Lin, Yuntian Deng, Khyathi Chandu, Faeze Brahman, Abhilasha Ravichander, Valentina Pyatkin, Nouha Dziri, Ronan Le Bras, and Yejin Choi. 2024 · 2024
Closest in time.
Llm evaluators recognize and favor their own generations
Arjun Panickssery, Samuel R Bowman, and Shi Feng. 2024 · 2024
Closest in time.
Polina Tsvilodub, Hening Wang, Sharon Grosch, and Michael Franke. 2024 · 2024
Closest in time.
Judging llm-as-a-judge with mt-bench and chatbot arena
Lianmin Zheng, Wei-Lin Chiang, Ying Sheng, Siyuan Zhuang, Zhanghao Wu, Yonghao Zhuang, Zi Lin, Zhuohan Li, Dacheng Li, Eric Xing, et al. 2024 · 2024
Closest in time.