mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

QualEval: Qualitative Evaluation for Model Improvement

arXiv 2311.02807 ↗First posted 6 Nov 2023cs.LG cs.AI cs.CLcited by 11

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Quantitative evaluation metrics have traditionally been pivotal in gauging the advancements of artificial intelligence systems, including large language models (LLMs). However, these metrics have inherent limitations. Given the intricate nature of real-world tasks, a single scalar to quantify and compare is insufficient to capture the fine-grained nuances of model behavior. Metrics serve only as a way to compare and benchmark models, and do not yield actionable diagnostics, thus making the model improvement process challenging. Model developers find themselves amid extensive manual efforts involving sifting through vast datasets and attempting hit-or-miss adjustments to training data or setups. In this work, we address the shortcomings of quantitative metrics by proposing QualEval, which augments quantitative scalar metrics with automated qualitative evaluation as a vehicle for model improvement. QualEval uses a powerful LLM reasoner and our novel flexible linear programming solver to generate human-readable insights that when applied, accelerate model improvement. The insights are backed by a comprehensive dashboard with fine-grained visualizations and human-interpretable analyses. We corroborate the faithfulness of QualEval by demonstrating that leveraging its insights, for example, improves the absolute performance of the Llama 2 model by up to 15% points relative on a challenging dialogue task (DialogSum) when compared to baselines. QualEval successfully increases the pace of model development, thus in essence serving as a data-scientist-in-a-box. Given the focus on critiquing and improving current evaluation metrics, our method serves as a refreshingly new technique for both model evaluation and improvement.

Key facts. Cited by 11 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 19 of its 29 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 6 Nov 2023.

Builds on

19 of 29 references.

References · 19

  1. 2021LoRA: Low-Rank Adaptation of Large Language Modelscited by 14,380
  2. 2023Llama 2: Open Foundation and Fine-Tuned Chat Modelscited by 13,028
  3. 2020Measuring Massive Multitask Language Understandingcited by 7,963
  4. 2019BERTScore: Evaluating Text Generation with BERTcited by 5,512
  5. 2021Program Synthesis with Large Language Modelscited by 3,637
  6. 2020Beyond Accuracy: Behavioral Testing of NLP models with CheckListcited by 1,006
  7. 2023Teaching Large Language Models to Self-Debugcited by 988
  8. 2022MedMCQA : A Large-scale Multi-Subject Multi-Choice Dataset for Medical domain Question Answeringcited by 543
  9. 2019AutoML: A Survey of the State-of-the-Artcited by 390
  10. 2023GPTScore: Evaluate as You Desirecited by 361
  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 233
7 more
  1. 2021DialogSum: A Real-Life Scenario Dialogue Summarization Datasetcited by 183
  2. 2023CodeBERTScore: Evaluating Code Generation with Pretrained Models of Codecited by 102
  3. 2021Explanation-Based Human Debugging of NLP Models: A Surveycited by 53
  4. 2021Meaningfully Debugging Model Mistakes using Conceptual Counterfactual Explanationscited by 53
  5. 2018Manifold: A Model-Agnostic Framework for Interpretation and Diagnosis of Machine Learning Modelscited by 50
  6. 2023AutoML in the Age of Large Language Models: Current Challenges, Future Opportunities and Riskscited by 35
  7. 2022AGRO: Adversarial Discovery of Error-prone groups for Robust Optimizationcited by 10

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2024: 3; 2025: 5; 2026: 3.

11 papers.