Digital Socrates: Evaluating LLMs through Explanation Critiques
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
While LLMs can provide reasoned explanations along with their answers, the nature and quality of those explanations are still poorly understood. In response, our goal is to define a detailed way of characterizing the explanation capabilities of modern models and to create a nuanced, interpretable explanation evaluation tool that can generate such characterizations automatically, without relying on expensive API calls or human annotations. Our approach is to (a) define the new task of explanation critiquing - identifying and categorizing any main flaw in an explanation and providing suggestions to address the flaw, (b) create a sizeable, human-verified dataset for this task, and (c) train an open-source, automatic critique model (called Digital Socrates) using this data. Through quantitative and qualitative analysis, we demonstrate how Digital Socrates is useful for revealing insights about student models by examining their reasoning chains, and how it can provide high-quality, nuanced, automatic evaluation of those model explanations for the first time. Digital Socrates thus fills an important gap in evaluation tools for understanding and improving the explanation behavior of models.
Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 36 of its 51 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 16 Nov 2023.
Builds on
36 of 51 references.
References · 36
- 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,199
- 2021LoRA: Low-Rank Adaptation of Large Language Modelscited by 14,084
- 2023Llama 2: Open Foundation and Fine-Tuned Chat Modelscited by 12,865
- 2020Measuring Massive Multitask Language Understandingcited by 7,768
- 2018Think you have Solved Question Answering? Try ARC, the AI2 Reasoning Challengecited by 4,710
- 2022Large Language Models are Zero-Shot Reasonerscited by 4,323
- 2019HellaSwag: Can a Machine Really Finish Your Sentence?cited by 4,018
- 2023QLoRA: Efficient Finetuning of Quantized LLMscited by 3,355
- 2023Self-Refine: Iterative Refinement with Self-Feedbackcited by 3,317
- 2019PIQA: Reasoning about Physical Commonsense in Natural Languagecited by 2,818
- 2023Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4cited by 2,579
- 2018Can a Suit of Armor Conduct Electricity? A New Dataset for Open Book Question Answeringcited by 2,114
24 more
- 2018CommonsenseQA: A Question Answering Challenge Targeting Commonsense Knowledgecited by 1,793
- 2023Pythia: A Suite for Analyzing Large Language Models Across Training and Scalingcited by 1,734
- 2023Measuring Faithfulness in Chain-of-Thought Reasoningcited by 668
- 2023Prometheus: Inducing Fine-grained Evaluation Capability in Language Modelscited by 558
- 2022Self-critiquing models for assisting human evaluatorscited by 372
- 2019Explain Yourself! Leveraging Language Models for Commonsense Reasoningcited by 367
- 2019Abductive Commonsense Reasoningcited by 300
- 2019Cosmos QA: Machine Reading Comprehension with Contextual Commonsense Reasoningcited by 281
- 2022ROSCOE: A Suite of Metrics for Scoring Step-by-Step Reasoningcited by 175
- 2022The Unreliability of Explanations in Few-shot Prompting for Textual Reasoningcited by 169
- 2020Unsupervised Commonsense Question Answering with Self-Talkcited by 161
- 2020Measuring Association Between Labels and Free-Text Rationalescited by 159
- 2023LM vs LM: Detecting Factual Errors via Cross Examinationcited by 155
- 2021Explaining Answers with Entailment Treescited by 148
- 2023Symbolic Chain-of-Thought Distillation: Small Models Can Also "Think" Step-by-Stepcited by 144
- 2023Question Decomposition Improves the Faithfulness of Model-Generated Reasoningcited by 107
- 2021UNICORN on RAINBOW: A Universal Commonsense Reasoning Model on a New Multitask Benchmarkcited by 98
- 2023Shepherd: A Critic for Language Model Generationcited by 96
- 2023ReCEval: Evaluating Reasoning Chains via Correctness and Informativenesscited by 76
- 2022Rainier: Reinforced Knowledge Introspector for Commonsense Question Answeringcited by 43
- 2021General-Purpose Question-Answering with Macawcited by 40
- 2023Are Machine Rationales (Not) Useful to Humans? Measuring and Improving Human Utility of Free-Text Rationalescited by 37
- 2023INSTRUCTSCORE: Explainable Text Generation Evaluation with Finegrained Feedbackcited by 21
- 2021DREAM: Improving Situational QA by First Elaborating the Situationcited by 18
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2024: 2; 2025: 2.
4 papers.
- 2024SimpleToM: Exposing the Gap between Explicit ToM Inference and Implicit ToM Application in LLMscited by 51
- 2024Human-LLM Compound System for Scientific Ideation through Facet Recombination and Novelty Evaluationcited by 39
- 2025EvalTree: Profiling Language Model Weaknesses via Hierarchical Capability Treescited by 26
- 2025Social Genome: Grounded Social Reasoning Abilities of Multimodal Modelscited by 24
- 2025EvalTree: Profiling Language Model Weaknesses via Hierarchical Capability Trees11 Mar 2025
- 2025Social Genome: Grounded Social Reasoning Abilities of Multimodal Models21 Feb 2025
- 2024SimpleToM: Exposing the Gap between Explicit ToM Inference and Implicit ToM Application in LLMs17 Oct 2024
- 2024Human-LLM Compound System for Scientific Ideation through Facet Recombination and Novelty Evaluation23 Sep 2024
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2024ACORN: Aspect-wise Commonsense Reasoning Explanation Evaluation
- 2023XplainLLM: A Knowledge-Augmented Dataset for Reliable Grounded Explanations in LLMs
- 2023Automated Assessment of Students' Code Comprehension using LLMs
- 2024iLLuMinaTE: An LLM-XAI Framework Leveraging Social Science Explanation Theories Towards Actionable Student Performance Feedback
- 2025Explain-Query-Test: Self-Evaluating LLMs Via Explanation and Comprehension Discrepancy
- 2026Beyond Accuracy: A Multidimensional Evaluation of Statistical Reasoning in Large Language Models
- 2026ICE: Intervention-Consistent Explanation Evaluation with Statistical Grounding for LLMs
- 2026Evaluating the False Trust Engendered by LLM Explanations