Correction of Errors in Preference Ratings from Automated Metrics for Text Generation
원문 초록
A major challenge in the field of Text Generation is evaluation: Human evaluations are cost-intensive, and automated metrics often display considerable disagreement with human judgments. In this paper, we propose a statistical model of Text Generation evaluation that accounts for the error-proneness of automated metrics when used to generate preference rankings between system outputs. We show that existing automated metrics are generally over-confident in assigning significant differences between systems in this setting. However, our model enables an efficient combination of human and automated ratings to remedy the error-proneness of the automated metrics. We show that using this combination, we only require about 50% of the human annotations typically used in evaluations to arrive at robust and statistically significant results while yielding the same evaluation outcome as the pure human evaluation in 95% of cases. We showcase the benefits of approach for three text generation tasks: dialogue systems, machine translation, and text summarization.
함께 살펴볼 논문
공통 태그를 근거로 연결했습니다. 실제 인용 관계나 논문의 우수성을 뜻하지 않습니다.
Document-Level Text Generation with Minimum Bayes Risk Decoding using Optimal Transport
Enhancing Paraphrase Type Generation: The Impact of DPO and RLHF Evaluated with Human-Ranked Data
ConTextual: Improving Clinical Text Summarization in LLMs with Context-preserving Token Filtering and Knowledge Graphs
MaCP: Minimal yet Mighty Adaptation via Hierarchical Cosine Projection
Exploring the Relationship Between Diversity and Quality in Ad Text Generation
Twitter Sentiment Analysis
토론
이 논문과 연결된 포럼 글이 아직 없습니다.