Layer or Representation Space: What makes BERT-based Evaluation Metrics Robust?
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
The evaluation of recent embedding-based evaluation metrics for text generation is primarily based on measuring their correlation with human evaluations on standard benchmarks. However, these benchmarks are mostly from similar domains to those used for pretraining word embeddings. This raises concerns about the (lack of) generalization of embedding-based metrics to new and noisy domains that contain a different vocabulary than the pretraining data. In this paper, we examine the robustness of BERTScore, one of the most popular embedding-based metrics for text generation. We show that (a) an embedding-based metric that has the highest correlation with human evaluations on a standard benchmark can have the lowest correlation if the amount of input noise or unknown tokens increases, (b) taking embeddings from the first layer of pretrained models improves the robustness of all metrics, and (c) the highest robustness is achieved when using character-level embeddings, instead of token-based embeddings, from the first layer of the pretrained model.
Key facts. Cited by 10 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 17 of its 30 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 6 Sep 2022.
Builds on
17 of 30 references.
References · 17
- 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,399
- 2019BERTScore: Evaluating Text Generation with BERTcited by 5,512
- 2020BLEURT: Learning Robust Metrics for Text Generationcited by 1,203
- 2020COMET: A Neural Framework for MT Evaluationcited by 1,033
- 2021BARTScore: Evaluating Generated Text as Text Generationcited by 722
- 2021ByT5: Towards a token-free future with pre-trained byte-to-byte modelscited by 509
- 2019MoverScore: Text Generation Evaluating with Contextualized Embeddings and Earth Mover Distancecited by 418
- 2019Text Processing Like Humans Do: Visually Attacking and Shielding NLP Systemscited by 101
- 2022Language Modelling with Pixelscited by 55
- 2021Perturbation CheckLists for Evaluating NLG Evaluation Metricscited by 50
- 2020From Hero to Z'eroe: A Benchmark of Low-Level Adversarial Attackscited by 36
- 2021Global Explainability of BERT-Based Evaluation Metrics by Disentangling along Linguistic Factorscited by 25
5 more
- 2022MENLI: Robust Evaluation Metrics from Natural Language Inferencecited by 18
- 2021BERT-Defense: A Probabilistic Model Based on BERT to Combat Cognitively Inspired Orthographic Adversarial Attackscited by 17
- 2022Towards Explainable Evaluation Metrics for Natural Language Generationcited by 15
- 2022RoMe: A Robust Metric for Evaluating Natural Language Generationcited by 6
- 2022A Dynamic, Interpreted CheckList for Meaning-oriented NLG Metric Evaluation -- through the Lens of Semantic Similarity Ratingcited by 5
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2022: 2; 2023: 5; 2024: 1; 2025: 0; 2026: 2.
10 papers.
- 2023LLMs as Narcissistic Evaluators: When Ego Inflates Evaluation Scorescited by 90
- 2022On the Blind Spots of Model-Based Evaluation Metrics for Text Generationcited by 49
- 2023The Eval4NLP 2023 Shared Task on Prompting Large Language Models as Explainable Metricscited by 23
- 2023NLG Evaluation Metrics Beyond Correlation Analysis: An Empirical Metric Preference Checklistcited by 16
- 2023Towards Explainable Evaluation Metrics for Machine Translationcited by 15
- 2023Evaluating Machine Translation Quality with Conformal Predictive Distributionscited by 9
- 2022EffEval: A Comprehensive Evaluation of Efficiency for MT Evaluation Metricscited by 4
- 2026LLM-based Embeddings: Attention Values Encode Sentence Semantics Better Than Hidden Statescited by 3
- 2024MEANT: Multimodal Encoder for Antecedent Informationcited by 0
- 2026Do MLLM Judges Judge the Edit? Auditing Bias in Image Editing Evaluation with Verified Quality Preservationcited by 0
- 2026Do MLLM Judges Judge the Edit? Auditing Bias in Image Editing Evaluation with Verified Quality Preservation1 Oct 2026
- 2026LLM-based Embeddings: Attention Values Encode Sentence Semantics Better Than Hidden States2 Feb 2026
- 2024MEANT: Multimodal Encoder for Antecedent Information10 Nov 2024
- 2023LLMs as Narcissistic Evaluators: When Ego Inflates Evaluation Scores16 Nov 2023
- 2023The Eval4NLP 2023 Shared Task on Prompting Large Language Models as Explainable Metrics30 Oct 2023
- 2023Towards Explainable Evaluation Metrics for Machine Translation22 Jun 2023
- 2023Evaluating Machine Translation Quality with Conformal Predictive Distributions2 Jun 2023
- 2023NLG Evaluation Metrics Beyond Correlation Analysis: An Empirical Metric Preference Checklist15 May 2023
- 2022On the Blind Spots of Model-Based Evaluation Metrics for Text Generation20 Dec 2022
- 2022EffEval: A Comprehensive Evaluation of Efficiency for MT Evaluation Metrics20 Sep 2022