Evaluating the open-form textual responses generated by Large Language Models (LLMs) typically requires measuring the semantic similarity of the response to a (human generated) reference. However, there is evidence that current semantic similarity methods may capture syntactic or lexical forms over semantic content. While benchmarks exist for semantic equivalence, they often suffer from high generation costs due to reliance on subjective human judgment, limited availability for domain-specific applications, and unclear definitions of equivalence. This paper introduces a novel method for generating benchmarks to evaluate semantic similarity methods for LLM outputs, specifically addressing these limitations. Our approach leverages knowledge graphs (KGs) to generate pairs of natural-language statements that are semantically similar or dissimilar, with dissimilar pairs categorized into one of four sub-types. We generate benchmark datasets in four different domains (general knowledge, biomedicine, finance, biology), and conduct a comparative study of semantic similarity methods including traditional natural language processing scores and LLM-as-a-judge predictions. We observe that the sub-type of semantic variation, as well as the domain of the benchmark impact the performance of semantic similarity methods, with no method being consistently superior.

Language models, particularly generative models, are susceptible to hallucinations, generating outputs that contradict factual knowledge or the source text. This study explores methods for detecting hallucinations in three SemEval-2024 Task 6 tasks: Machine Translation, Definition Modeling, and Paraphrase Generation. We evaluate two methods: semantic similarity between the generated text and factual references, and an ensemble of language models that judge each other's outputs. Our results show that semantic similarity achieves moderate accuracy and correlation scores in trial data, while the ensemble method offers insights into the complexities of hallucination detection but falls short of expectations. This work highlights the challenges of hallucination detection and underscores the need for further research in this critical area.