mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Persuasiveness of Generated Free-Text Rationales in Subjective Decisions: A Case Study on Pairwise Argument Ranking

arXiv 2406.13905 ↗First posted 20 Jun 2024cs.CLcited by 7

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Generating free-text rationales is among the emergent capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs). These rationales have been found to enhance LLM performance across various NLP tasks. Recently, there has been growing interest in using these rationales to provide insights for various important downstream tasks. In this paper, we analyze generated free-text rationales in tasks with subjective answers, emphasizing the importance of rationalization in such scenarios. We focus on pairwise argument ranking, a highly subjective task with significant potential for real-world applications, such as debate assistance. We evaluate the persuasiveness of rationales generated by nine LLMs to support their subjective choices. Our findings suggest that open-source LLMs, particularly Llama2-70B-chat, are capable of providing highly persuasive rationalizations, surpassing even GPT models. Additionally, our experiments show that rationale persuasiveness can be improved by controlling its parameters through prompting or through self-refinement.

Key facts. Cited by 7 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 24 of its 40 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 20 Jun 2024.

Builds on

24 of 40 references.

References · 24

  1. 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,199
  2. 2023LLaMA: Open and Efficient Foundation Language Modelscited by 13,958
  3. 2017A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictionscited by 6,488
  4. 2022PaLM: Scaling Language Modeling with Pathwayscited by 5,304
  5. 2023G-Eval: NLG Evaluation using GPT-4 with Better Human Alignmentcited by 2,205
  6. 2022BLOOM: A 176B-Parameter Open-Access Multilingual Language Modelcited by 1,968
  7. 2023Can Large Language Models Be an Alternative to Human Evaluations?cited by 729
  8. 2022Large Language Models Can Self-Improvecited by 656
  9. 2023How Far Can Camels Go? Exploring the State of Instruction Tuning on Open Resourcescited by 405
  10. 2023Is ChatGPT Good at Search? Investigating Large Language Models as Re-Ranking Agentscited by 356
  11. 2023Large Language Models are Effective Text Rankers with Pairwise Ranking Promptingcited by 302
  12. 2020Measuring Association Between Labels and Free-Text Rationalescited by 159
12 more
  1. 2021Teach Me to Explain: A Review of Datasets for Explainable Natural Language Processingcited by 126
  2. 2024On the Conversational Persuasiveness of Large Language Models: A Randomized Controlled Trialcited by 105
  3. 2020Leakage-Adjusted Simulatability: Can Models Generate Non-Trivial Explanations of Their Behavior in Natural Language?cited by 95
  4. 2021Few-Shot Self-Rationalization with Natural Language Promptscited by 83
  5. 2019A Large-scale Dataset for Argument Quality Ranking: Construction and Analysiscited by 66
  6. 2023Large Language Models Help Humans Verify Truthfulness -- Except When They Are Convincingly Wrongcited by 51
  7. 2019Automatic Argument Quality Assessment -- New Datasets and Methodscited by 47
  8. 2023Are Machine Rationales (Not) Useful to Humans? Measuring and Improving Human Utility of Free-Text Rationalescited by 37
  9. 2024Are Large Language Models Reliable Argument Quality Annotators?cited by 24
  10. 2024Can Language Models Recognize Convincing Arguments?cited by 21
  11. 2024LLM-Generated Black-box Explanations Can Be Adversarially Helpfulcited by 20
  12. 2018Finding Convincing Arguments Using Scalable Bayesian Preference Learningcited by 17

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2024: 3; 2025: 2; 2026: 2.

7 papers.