Goto

Collaborating Authors

 better automatic evaluation


A Survey of Automatic Evaluation Methods on Text, Visual and Speech Generations

arXiv.org Artificial Intelligence

Recent advances in deep learning have significantly enhanced generative AI capabilities across text, images, and audio. However, automatically evaluating the quality of these generated outputs presents ongoing challenges. Although numerous automatic evaluation methods exist, current research lacks a systematic framework that comprehensively organizes these methods across text, visual, and audio modalities. To address this issue, we present a comprehensive review and a unified taxonomy of automatic evaluation methods for generated content across all three modalities; We identify five fundamental paradigms that characterize existing evaluation approaches across these domains. Our analysis begins by examining evaluation methods for text generation, where techniques are most mature. We then extend this framework to image and audio generation, demonstrating its broad applicability. Finally, we discuss promising directions for future research in cross-modal evaluation methodologies.


Foundational Autoraters: Taming Large Language Models for Better Automatic Evaluation

arXiv.org Artificial Intelligence

As large language models (LLMs) advance, it becomes more challenging to reliably evaluate their output due to the high costs of human evaluation. To make progress towards better LLM autoraters, we introduce FLAMe, a family of Foundational Large Autorater Models. FLAMe is trained on our large and diverse collection of 100+ quality assessment tasks comprising 5M+ human judgments, curated and standardized using publicly released human evaluations from previous research. FLAMe significantly improves generalization to a wide variety of held-out tasks, outperforming LLMs trained on proprietary data like GPT-4 and Claude-3 on many tasks. We show that FLAMe can also serve as a powerful starting point for further downstream fine-tuning, using reward modeling evaluation as a case study (FLAMe-RM). Notably, on RewardBench, our FLAMe-RM-24B model (with an accuracy of 87.8%) is the top-performing generative model trained exclusively on permissively licensed data, outperforming both GPT-4-0125 (85.9%) and GPT-4o (84.7%). Additionally, we explore a more computationally efficient approach using a novel tail-patch fine-tuning strategy to optimize our FLAMe multitask mixture for reward modeling evaluation (FLAMe-Opt-RM), offering competitive RewardBench performance while requiring approximately 25x less training datapoints. Overall, our FLAMe variants outperform all popular proprietary LLM-as-a-Judge models we consider across 8 out of 12 autorater evaluation benchmarks, encompassing 53 quality assessment tasks, including RewardBench and LLM-AggreFact. Finally, our analysis reveals that FLAMe is significantly less biased than these LLM-as-a-Judge models on the CoBBLEr autorater bias benchmark, while effectively identifying high-quality responses for code generation.