mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Digital Socrates: Evaluating LLMs through Explanation Critiques

arXiv 2311.09613 ↗First posted 16 Nov 2023cs.CL cs.AIcited by 4

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

  1. 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,199
  2. 2021LoRA: Low-Rank Adaptation of Large Language Modelscited by 14,084
  3. 2023Llama 2: Open Foundation and Fine-Tuned Chat Modelscited by 12,865
  4. 2020Measuring Massive Multitask Language Understandingcited by 7,768
  5. 2018Think you have Solved Question Answering? Try ARC, the AI2 Reasoning Challengecited by 4,710
  6. 2022Large Language Models are Zero-Shot Reasonerscited by 4,323
  7. 2019HellaSwag: Can a Machine Really Finish Your Sentence?cited by 4,018
  8. 2023QLoRA: Efficient Finetuning of Quantized LLMscited by 3,355
  9. 2023Self-Refine: Iterative Refinement with Self-Feedbackcited by 3,317
  10. 2019PIQA: Reasoning about Physical Commonsense in Natural Languagecited by 2,818
  11. 2023Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4cited by 2,579
  12. 2018Can a Suit of Armor Conduct Electricity? A New Dataset for Open Book Question Answeringcited by 2,114
24 more
  1. 2018CommonsenseQA: A Question Answering Challenge Targeting Commonsense Knowledgecited by 1,793
  2. 2023Pythia: A Suite for Analyzing Large Language Models Across Training and Scalingcited by 1,734
  3. 2023Measuring Faithfulness in Chain-of-Thought Reasoningcited by 668
  4. 2023Prometheus: Inducing Fine-grained Evaluation Capability in Language Modelscited by 558
  5. 2022Self-critiquing models for assisting human evaluatorscited by 372
  6. 2019Explain Yourself! Leveraging Language Models for Commonsense Reasoningcited by 367
  7. 2019Abductive Commonsense Reasoningcited by 300
  8. 2019Cosmos QA: Machine Reading Comprehension with Contextual Commonsense Reasoningcited by 281
  9. 2022ROSCOE: A Suite of Metrics for Scoring Step-by-Step Reasoningcited by 175
  10. 2022The Unreliability of Explanations in Few-shot Prompting for Textual Reasoningcited by 169
  11. 2020Unsupervised Commonsense Question Answering with Self-Talkcited by 161
  12. 2020Measuring Association Between Labels and Free-Text Rationalescited by 159
  13. 2023LM vs LM: Detecting Factual Errors via Cross Examinationcited by 155
  14. 2021Explaining Answers with Entailment Treescited by 148
  15. 2023Symbolic Chain-of-Thought Distillation: Small Models Can Also "Think" Step-by-Stepcited by 144
  16. 2023Question Decomposition Improves the Faithfulness of Model-Generated Reasoningcited by 107
  17. 2021UNICORN on RAINBOW: A Universal Commonsense Reasoning Model on a New Multitask Benchmarkcited by 98
  18. 2023Shepherd: A Critic for Language Model Generationcited by 96
  19. 2023ReCEval: Evaluating Reasoning Chains via Correctness and Informativenesscited by 76
  20. 2022Rainier: Reinforced Knowledge Introspector for Commonsense Question Answeringcited by 43
  21. 2021General-Purpose Question-Answering with Macawcited by 40
  22. 2023Are Machine Rationales (Not) Useful to Humans? Measuring and Improving Human Utility of Free-Text Rationalescited by 37
  23. 2023INSTRUCTSCORE: Explainable Text Generation Evaluation with Finegrained Feedbackcited by 21
  24. 2021DREAM: Improving Situational QA by First Elaborating the Situationcited by 18

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2024: 2; 2025: 2.

4 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2024ACORN: Aspect-wise Commonsense Reasoning Explanation Evaluation
  2. 2023XplainLLM: A Knowledge-Augmented Dataset for Reliable Grounded Explanations in LLMs
  3. 2023Automated Assessment of Students' Code Comprehension using LLMs
  4. 2024iLLuMinaTE: An LLM-XAI Framework Leveraging Social Science Explanation Theories Towards Actionable Student Performance Feedback
  5. 2025Explain-Query-Test: Self-Evaluating LLMs Via Explanation and Comprehension Discrepancy
  6. 2026Beyond Accuracy: A Multidimensional Evaluation of Statistical Reasoning in Large Language Models
  7. 2026ICE: Intervention-Consistent Explanation Evaluation with Statistical Grounding for LLMs
  8. 2026Evaluating the False Trust Engendered by LLM Explanations