ACORN: Aspect-wise Commonsense Reasoning Explanation Evaluation
On the map: LLM reasoning → Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation
Abstract (arXiv)
Evaluating the quality of free-text explanations is a multifaceted, subjective, and labor-intensive task. Large language models (LLMs) present an appealing alternative due to their potential for consistency, scalability, and cost-efficiency. In this work, we present ACORN, a new dataset of 3,500 free-text explanations and aspect-wise quality ratings, and use it to evaluate how LLMs rate explanations. We observed that larger models outputted labels that maintained or increased the inter-annotator agreement, suggesting that they are within the expected variance between human raters. However, their correlation with majority-voted human ratings varied across different quality aspects, indicating that they are not a complete replacement. In turn, using LLMs as a supplement to a smaller group of human raters in some cases improved the correlation with the original majority labels. However, the effect was limited to cases where human raters were scarce, and an additional human rater had a more pronounced effect in all cases. Overall, we recommend against using LLMs as a complete replacement for human raters but encourage using them in configurations that end with targeted human involvement. Data available here: https://github.com/a-brassard/ACORN
Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning. Builds on 5 of its 36 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 8 May 2024.
Builds on
5 of 36 references.
References · 5
- 2023GPT-4 Technical Reportcited by 18,132
- 2024Mixtral of Expertscited by 1,785
- 2023A Survey of Hallucination in Large Foundation Modelscited by 365
- 2023Are Machine Rationales (Not) Useful to Humans? Measuring and Improving Human Utility of Free-Text Rationalescited by 37
- 2022Despite "super-human" performance, current LLMs are unsuited for decisions about ethics and safetycited by 13
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 3.
3 papers.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026Argument Quality Assessment with Large Language Models: A Pairwise Bradley-Terry Approach
- 2024From Data to Commonsense Reasoning: The Use of Large Language Models for Explainable AI
- 2025Rethinking Human Preference Evaluation of LLM Rationales
- 2024Sample-Efficient Human Evaluation of Large Language Models via Maximum Discrepancy Competition
- 2025ReTraceQA: Evaluating Reasoning Traces of Small Language Models in Commonsense Question Answering
- 2025Zero-Shot Commonsense Validation and Reasoning with Large Language Models: An Evaluation on SemEval-2020 Task 4 Dataset
- 2023XplainLLM: A Knowledge-Augmented Dataset for Reliable Grounded Explanations in LLMs
- 2025Threading the Needle: Reweaving Chain-of-Thought Reasoning to Explain Human Label Variation