Analyzing and Evaluating Correlation Measures in NLG Meta-Evaluation
원문 초록
The correlation between NLG automatic evaluation metrics and human evaluation is often regarded as a critical criterion for assessing the capability of an evaluation metric. However, different grouping methods and correlation coefficients result in various types of correlation measures used in meta-evaluation. In specific evaluation scenarios, prior work often directly follows conventional measure settings, but the characteristics and differences between these measures have not gotten sufficient attention. Therefore, this paper analyzes 12 common correlation measures using a large amount of real-world data from six widely-used NLG evaluation datasets and 32 evaluation metrics, revealing that different measures indeed impact the meta-evaluation results. Furthermore, we propose three perspectives that reflect the capability of meta-evaluation: discriminative power, ranking consistency, and sensitivity to score granularity. We find that the measure using global grouping and Pearson correlation coefficient exhibits the best performance in both discriminative power and ranking consistency. Besides, the measures using system-level grouping or Kendall correlation are the least sensitive to score granularity.
함께 살펴볼 논문
공통 태그를 근거로 연결했습니다. 실제 인용 관계나 논문의 우수성을 뜻하지 않습니다.
OpeNLGauge: An Explainable Metric for NLG Evaluation with Open-Weights LLMs
Themis: A Reference-free NLG Evaluation Language Model with Flexibility and Interpretability
Defining and Detecting Vulnerability in Human Evaluation Guidelines: A Preliminary Study Towards Reliable NLG Evaluation
Better than Random: Reliable NLG Human Evaluation with Constrained Active Sampling
Unveiling the Achilles' Heel of NLG Evaluators: A Unified Adversarial Framework Driven by Large Language Models
DEBATE: Devil's Advocate-Based Assessment and Text Evaluation
토론
이 논문과 연결된 포럼 글이 아직 없습니다.