mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Automatic Evaluation of Generative Models with Instruction Tuning

arXiv 2310.20072 ↗First posted 30 Oct 2023cs.CL cs.LGcited by 4

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Automatic evaluation of natural language generation has long been an elusive goal in NLP.A recent paradigm fine-tunes pre-trained language models to emulate human judgements for a particular task and evaluation criterion. Inspired by the generalization ability of instruction-tuned models, we propose a learned metric based on instruction tuning. To test our approach, we collected HEAP, a dataset of human judgements across various NLG tasks and evaluation criteria. Our findings demonstrate that instruction tuning language models on HEAP yields good performance on many evaluation tasks, though some criteria are less trivial to learn than others. Further, jointly training on multiple tasks can yield additional performance improvements, which can be beneficial for future tasks with little to no human annotated data.

Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 21 of its 39 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 30 Oct 2023.

Builds on

21 of 39 references.

References · 21

  1. 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,199
  2. 2019BART: Denoising Sequence-to-Sequence Pre-training for Natural Language Generation, Translation, and Comprehensioncited by 5,874
  3. 2019BERTScore: Evaluating Text Generation with BERTcited by 5,462
  4. 2019HellaSwag: Can a Machine Really Finish Your Sentence?cited by 4,018
  5. 2017Deep reinforcement learning from human preferencescited by 3,846
  6. 2021Finetuned Language Models Are Zero-Shot Learnerscited by 3,747
  7. 2022Training a Helpful and Harmless Assistant with Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedbackcited by 3,634
  8. 2020BLEURT: Learning Robust Metrics for Text Generationcited by 1,196
  9. 2021A General Language Assistant as a Laboratory for Alignmentcited by 1,023
  10. 2021Cross-Task Generalization via Natural Language Crowdsourcing Instructionscited by 696
  11. 2016How NOT To Evaluate Your Dialogue System: An Empirical Study of Unsupervised Evaluation Metrics for Dialogue Response Generationcited by 356
  12. 2017Why We Need New Evaluation Metrics for NLGcited by 232
9 more
  1. 2019Neural Text Summarization: A Critical Evaluationcited by 189
  2. 2019Handling Divergent Reference Texts when Evaluating Table-to-Text Generationcited by 119
  3. 2019Counterfactual Story Reasoning and Generationcited by 87
  4. 2018Towards a Better Metric for Evaluating Question Generation Systemscited by 52
  5. 2019Better Automatic Evaluation of Open-Domain Dialogue Systems with Contextualized Embeddingscited by 52
  6. 2020Learning an Unreferenced Metric for Online Dialogue Evaluationcited by 52
  7. 2020Designing Precise and Robust Dialogue Response Evaluatorscited by 37
  8. 2022Using Pre-Trained Language Models for Producing Counter Narratives Against Hate Speech: a Comparative Studycited by 30
  9. 2021TellMeWhy: A Dataset for Answering Why-Questions in Narrativescited by 27

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2023: 1; 2024: 0; 2025: 2; 2026: 1.

4 papers.