mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

RepEval: Effective Text Evaluation with LLM Representation

arXiv 2404.19563 ↗First posted 30 Apr 2024cs.CLcited by 6

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

The era of Large Language Models (LLMs) raises new demands for automatic evaluation metrics, which should be adaptable to various application scenarios while maintaining low cost and effectiveness. Traditional metrics for automatic text evaluation are often tailored to specific scenarios, while LLM-based evaluation metrics are costly, requiring fine-tuning or rely heavily on the generation capabilities of LLMs. Besides, previous LLM-based metrics ignore the fact that, within the space of LLM representations, there exist direction vectors that indicate the estimation of text quality. To this end, we introduce RepEval, a metric that leverages the projection of LLM representations for evaluation. Through simple prompt modifications, RepEval can easily transition to various tasks, requiring only minimal sample pairs for direction vector construction. Results on fourteen datasets across two evaluation tasks demonstrate the high effectiveness of our method, which exhibits a higher correlation with human judgments than previous methods, even in complex evaluation scenarios involving pair-wise selection under nuanced aspects. Our work underscores the richness of information regarding text quality embedded within LLM representations, offering insights for the development of new metrics.

Key facts. Cited by 6 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 26 of its 46 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 30 Apr 2024.

Builds on

26 of 46 references.

References · 26

  1. 2023Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arenacited by 8,393
  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. 2022Constitutional AI: Harmlessness from AI Feedbackcited by 2,950
  5. 2020DeBERTa: Decoding-enhanced BERT with Disentangled Attentioncited by 2,157
  6. 2023Representation Engineering: A Top-Down Approach to AI Transparencycited by 1,239
  7. 2015Teaching Machines to Read and Comprehendcited by 1,039
  8. 2020COMET: A Neural Framework for MT Evaluationcited by 1,024
  9. 2021A General Language Assistant as a Laboratory for Alignmentcited by 1,023
  10. 2023Can Large Language Models Be an Alternative to Human Evaluations?cited by 729
  11. 2021BARTScore: Evaluating Generated Text as Text Generationcited by 719
  12. 2020SummEval: Re-evaluating Summarization Evaluationcited by 666
14 more
  1. 2019MoverScore: Text Generation Evaluating with Contextualized Embeddings and Earth Mover Distancecited by 415
  2. 2020Asking and Answering Questions to Evaluate the Factual Consistency of Summariescited by 376
  3. 2018Newsroom: A Dataset of 1.3 Million Summaries with Diverse Extractive Strategiescited by 292
  4. 2022Towards a Unified Multi-Dimensional Evaluator for Text Generationcited by 264
  5. 2020USR: An Unsupervised and Reference Free Evaluation Metric for Dialog Generationcited by 186
  6. 2022Repairing the Cracked Foundation: A Survey of Obstacles in Evaluation Practices for Generated Textcited by 154
  7. 2015Semantically Conditioned LSTM-based Natural Language Generation for Spoken Dialogue Systemscited by 134
  8. 2023Human-like Summarization Evaluation with ChatGPTcited by 126
  9. 2020ASSET: A Dataset for Tuning and Evaluation of Sentence Simplification Models with Multiple Rewriting Transformationscited by 101
  10. 2018Sentence-Level Fluency Evaluation: References Help, But Can Be Spared!cited by 43
  11. 2022CTRLEval: An Unsupervised Reference-Free Metric for Evaluating Controlled Text Generationcited by 29
  12. 2018Discourse Coherence in the Wild: A Dataset, Evaluation and Methodscited by 20
  13. 2021BEAMetrics: A Benchmark for Language Generation Evaluation Evaluationcited by 6
  14. 2024Is Reference Necessary in the Evaluation of NLG Systems? When and Where?cited by 6

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 4; 2026: 2.

6 papers.