Human evaluation is indispensable and inevitable for assessing the quality of texts generated by machine learning models or written by humans. However, human evaluation is very difficult to reproduce and its quality is notoriously unstable, hindering fair comparisons among different natural language processing (NLP) models and algorithms. Recently, large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated exceptional performance on unseen tasks when only the task instructions are provided. In this paper, we explore if such an ability of the LLMs can be used as an alternative to human evaluation. We present the LLMs with the exact same instructions, samples to be evaluated, and questions used to conduct human evaluation, and then ask the LLMs to generate responses to those questions; we dub this LLM evaluation. We use human evaluation and LLM evaluation to evaluate the texts in two NLP tasks: open-ended story generation and adversarial attacks. We show that the result of LLM evaluation is consistent with the results obtained by expert human evaluation: the texts rated higher by human experts are also rated higher by the LLMs. We also find that the results of LLM evaluation are stable over different formatting of the task instructions and the sampling algorithm used to generate the answer. We are the first to show the potential of using LLMs to assess the quality of texts and discuss the limitations and ethical considerations of LLM evaluation.
相關內容
Large language models have exhibited exceptional performance on various Natural Language Processing (NLP) tasks, leveraging techniques such as the pre-training, and instruction fine-tuning. Despite these advances, their effectiveness in medical applications is limited, due to challenges such as factual inaccuracies, reasoning abilities, and lack grounding in real-world experience. In this study, we present ClinicalGPT, a language model explicitly designed and optimized for clinical scenarios. By incorporating extensive and diverse real-world data, such as medical records, domain-specific knowledge, and multi-round dialogue consultations in the training process, ClinicalGPT is better prepared to handle multiple clinical task. Furthermore, we introduce a comprehensive evaluation framework that includes medical knowledge question-answering, medical exams, patient consultations, and diagnostic analysis of medical records. Our results demonstrate that ClinicalGPT significantly outperforms other models in these tasks, highlighting the effectiveness of our approach in adapting large language models to the critical domain of healthcare.
Recent research has focused on using large language models (LLMs) to generate explanations for hate speech through fine-tuning or prompting. Despite the growing interest in this area, these generated explanations' effectiveness and potential limitations remain poorly understood. A key concern is that these explanations, generated by LLMs, may lead to erroneous judgments about the nature of flagged content by both users and content moderators. For instance, an LLM-generated explanation might inaccurately convince a content moderator that a benign piece of content is hateful. In light of this, we propose an analytical framework for examining hate speech explanations and conducted an extensive survey on evaluating such explanations. Specifically, we prompted GPT-3 to generate explanations for both hateful and non-hateful content, and a survey was conducted with 2,400 unique respondents to evaluate the generated explanations. Our findings reveal that (1) human evaluators rated the GPT-generated explanations as high quality in terms of linguistic fluency, informativeness, persuasiveness, and logical soundness, (2) the persuasive nature of these explanations, however, varied depending on the prompting strategy employed, and (3) this persuasiveness may result in incorrect judgments about the hatefulness of the content. Our study underscores the need for caution in applying LLM-generated explanations for content moderation. Code and results are available at //github.com/Social-AI-Studio/GPT3-HateEval.
Clickbait, which aims to induce users with some surprising and even thrilling headlines for increasing click-through rates, permeates almost all online content publishers, such as news portals and social media. Recently, Large Language Models (LLMs) have emerged as a powerful instrument and achieved tremendous success in a serious of NLP downstream tasks. However, it is not yet known whether LLMs can be served as a high-quality clickbait detection system. In this paper, we analyze the performance of LLMs in the few-shot scenarios on a number of English and Chinese benchmark datasets. Experimental results show that LLMs cannot achieve the best results compared to the state-of-the-art deep and fine-tuning PLMs methods. Different from the human intuition, the experiments demonstrated that LLMs cannot make satisfied clickbait detection just by the headlines.
Recent text-to-image generative models can generate high-fidelity images from text inputs, but the quality of these generated images cannot be accurately evaluated by existing evaluation metrics. To address this issue, we introduce Human Preference Dataset v2 (HPD v2), a large-scale dataset that captures human preferences on images from a wide range of sources. HPD v2 comprises 798,090 human preference choices on 430,060 pairs of images, making it the largest dataset of its kind. The text prompts and images are deliberately collected to eliminate potential bias, which is a common issue in previous datasets. By fine-tuning CLIP on HPD v2, we obtain Human Preference Score v2 (HPS v2), a scoring model that can more accurately predict text-generated images' human preferences. Our experiments demonstrate that HPS v2 generalizes better than previous metrics across various image distributions and is responsive to algorithmic improvements of text-to-image generative models, making it a preferable evaluation metric for these models. We also investigate the design of the evaluation prompts for text-to-image generative models, to make the evaluation stable, fair and easy-to-use. Finally, we establish a benchmark for text-to-image generative models using HPS v2, which includes a set of recent text-to-image models from the academia, community and industry. The code and dataset is / will be available at //github.com/tgxs002/HPSv2.
Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs) have recently played a dominant role in multimodal vision-language learning. Despite the great success, it lacks a holistic evaluation of their efficacy. This paper presents a comprehensive evaluation of publicly available large multimodal models by building a LVLM evaluation Hub (LVLM-eHub). Our LVLM-eHub consists of $8$ representative LVLMs such as InstructBLIP and MiniGPT-4, which are thoroughly evaluated by a quantitative capability evaluation and an online arena platform. The former evaluates $6$ categories of multimodal capabilities of LVLMs such as visual question answering and embodied artificial intelligence on $47$ standard text-related visual benchmarks, while the latter provides the user-level evaluation of LVLMs in an open-world question-answering scenario. The study reveals several innovative findings. First, instruction-tuned LVLM with massive in-domain data such as InstructBLIP heavily overfits many existing tasks, generalizing poorly in the open-world scenario. Second, instruction-tuned LVLM with moderate instruction-following data may result in object hallucination issues (i.e., generate objects that are inconsistent with target images in the descriptions). It either makes the current evaluation metric such as CIDEr for image captioning ineffective or generates wrong answers. Third, employing a multi-turn reasoning evaluation framework can mitigate the issue of object hallucination, shedding light on developing an effective pipeline for LVLM evaluation. The findings provide a foundational framework for the conception and assessment of innovative strategies aimed at enhancing zero-shot multimodal techniques. Our LVLM-eHub will be available at //github.com/OpenGVLab/Multi-Modality-Arena
Information access systems, such as search engines, recommender systems, and conversational assistants, have become integral to our daily lives as they help us satisfy our information needs. However, evaluating the effectiveness of these systems presents a long-standing and complex scientific challenge. This challenge is rooted in the difficulty of assessing a system's overall effectiveness in assisting users to complete tasks through interactive support, and further exacerbated by the substantial variation in user behaviour and preferences. To address this challenge, user simulation emerges as a promising solution. This book focuses on providing a thorough understanding of user simulation techniques designed specifically for evaluation purposes. We begin with a background of information access system evaluation and explore the diverse applications of user simulation. Subsequently, we systematically review the major research progress in user simulation, covering both general frameworks for designing user simulators, utilizing user simulation for evaluation, and specific models and algorithms for simulating user interactions with search engines, recommender systems, and conversational assistants. Realizing that user simulation is an interdisciplinary research topic, whenever possible, we attempt to establish connections with related fields, including machine learning, dialogue systems, user modeling, and economics. We end the book with a detailed discussion of important future research directions, many of which extend beyond the evaluation of information access systems and are expected to have broader impact on how to evaluate interactive intelligent systems in general.
Generative artificial intelligence (AI) is a widely popular technology that will have a profound impact on society and individuals. Less than a decade ago, it was thought that creative work would be among the last to be automated - yet today, we see AI encroaching on many creative domains. In this paper, we present the findings of a survey study on people's perceptions of text-to-image generation. We touch on participants' technical understanding of the emerging technology, their fears and concerns, and thoughts about risks and dangers of text-to-image generation to the individual and society. We find that while participants were aware of the risks and dangers associated with the technology, only few participants considered the technology to be a personal risk. The risks for others were more easy to recognize for participants. Artists were particularly seen at risk. Participants who had tried the technology rated its future importance lower than those who had not tried it. This result shows that many people are still oblivious of the potential personal risks of generative artificial intelligence and the impending societal changes associated with this technology.
Code comment generation aims at generating natural language descriptions for a code snippet to facilitate developers' program comprehension activities. Despite being studied for a long time, a bottleneck for existing approaches is that given a code snippet, they can only generate one comment while developers usually need to know information from diverse perspectives such as what is the functionality of this code snippet and how to use it. To tackle this limitation, this study empirically investigates the feasibility of utilizing large language models (LLMs) to generate comments that can fulfill developers' diverse intents. Our intuition is based on the facts that (1) the code and its pairwise comment are used during the pre-training process of LLMs to build the semantic connection between the natural language and programming language, and (2) comments in the real-world projects, which are collected for the pre-training, usually contain different developers' intents. We thus postulate that the LLMs can already understand the code from different perspectives after the pre-training. Indeed, experiments on two large-scale datasets demonstrate the rationale of our insights: by adopting the in-context learning paradigm and giving adequate prompts to the LLM (e.g., providing it with ten or more examples), the LLM can significantly outperform a state-of-the-art supervised learning approach on generating comments with multiple intents. Results also show that customized strategies for constructing the prompts and post-processing strategies for reranking the results can both boost the LLM's performances, which shed light on future research directions for using LLMs to achieve comment generation.
Robots operating alongside humans often encounter unfamiliar environments that make autonomous task completion challenging. Though improving models and increasing dataset size can enhance a robot's performance in unseen environments, dataset generation and model refinement may be impractical in every unfamiliar environment. Approaches that utilize human demonstration through manual operation can aid in generalizing to these unfamiliar environments, but often require significant human effort and expertise to achieve satisfactory task performance. To address these challenges, we propose leveraging part-time human interaction for redirection of robots during failed task execution. We train a lightweight help policy that allows robots to learn when to proceed autonomously or request human assistance at times of uncertainty. By incorporating part-time human intervention, robots recover quickly from their mistakes. Our best performing policy yields a 20 percent increase in path-length weighted success with only a 21 percent human interaction ratio. This approach provides a practical means for robots to interact and learn from humans in real-world settings, facilitating effective task completion without the need for significant human intervention.
Large language models (LLMs) have significantly advanced the field of natural language processing (NLP), providing a highly useful, task-agnostic foundation for a wide range of applications. The great promise of LLMs as general task solvers motivated people to extend their functionality largely beyond just a ``chatbot'', and use it as an assistant or even replacement for domain experts and tools in specific domains such as healthcare, finance, and education. However, directly applying LLMs to solve sophisticated problems in specific domains meets many hurdles, caused by the heterogeneity of domain data, the sophistication of domain knowledge, the uniqueness of domain objectives, and the diversity of the constraints (e.g., various social norms, cultural conformity, religious beliefs, and ethical standards in the domain applications). To fill such a gap, explosively-increase research, and practices have been conducted in very recent years on the domain specialization of LLMs, which, however, calls for a comprehensive and systematic review to better summarizes and guide this promising domain. In this survey paper, first, we propose a systematic taxonomy that categorizes the LLM domain-specialization techniques based on the accessibility to LLMs and summarizes the framework for all the subcategories as well as their relations and differences to each other. We also present a comprehensive taxonomy of critical application domains that can benefit from specialized LLMs, discussing their practical significance and open challenges. Furthermore, we offer insights into the current research status and future trends in this area.
小貼士
登錄享
相關主題
注冊地址： 北京市海淀區羊坊店路18號2幢3層301-191