mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

RevisEval: Improving LLM-as-a-Judge via Response-Adapted References

arXiv 2410.05193 ↗First posted 7 Oct 2024cs.CLcited by 20

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

With significant efforts in recent studies, LLM-as-a-Judge has become a cost-effective alternative to human evaluation for assessing text generation quality in a wide range of tasks. However, there still remains a reliability gap between LLM-as-a-Judge and human evaluation. One important reason is the lack of guided oracles in the evaluation process. Motivated by the role of reference pervasively used in classic text evaluation, we introduce RevisEval, a novel text generation evaluation paradigm via the response-adapted references. RevisEval is driven by the key observation that an ideal reference should maintain the necessary relevance to the response to be evaluated. Specifically, RevisEval leverages the text revision capabilities of large language models (LLMs) to adaptively revise the response, then treat the revised text as the reference (response-adapted reference) for the subsequent evaluation. Extensive experiments demonstrate that RevisEval outperforms traditional reference-free and reference-based evaluation paradigms that use LLM-as-a-Judge across NLG tasks and open-ended instruction-following tasks. More importantly, our response-adapted references can further boost the classical text metrics, e.g., BLEU and BERTScore, compared to traditional references and even rival the LLM-as-a-Judge. A detailed analysis is also conducted to confirm RevisEval's effectiveness in bias reduction, the impact of inference cost, and reference relevance.

Key facts. Cited by 20 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 49 of its 61 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 7 Oct 2024.

Builds on

49 of 61 references.

References · 49

  1. 2023GPT-4 Technical Reportcited by 18,396
  2. 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,971
  3. 2024The Llama 3 Herd of Modelscited by 14,715
  4. 2022Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Modelscited by 12,459
  5. 2023Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arenacited by 8,626
  6. 2019BERTScore: Evaluating Text Generation with BERTcited by 5,512
  7. 2022Training a Helpful and Harmless Assistant with Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedbackcited by 3,720
  8. 2023GPQA: A Graduate-Level Google-Proof Q&A Benchmarkcited by 2,879
  9. 2023G-Eval: NLG Evaluation using GPT-4 with Better Human Alignmentcited by 2,276
  10. 2023A Survey on Evaluation of Large Language Modelscited by 1,242
  11. 2023Large Language Models are not Fair Evaluatorscited by 1,085
  12. 2024Length-Controlled AlpacaEval: A Simple Way to Debias Automatic Evaluatorscited by 897
37 more
  1. 2023ChatGPT Outperforms Crowd-Workers for Text-Annotation Taskscited by 870
  2. 2021BARTScore: Evaluating Generated Text as Text Generationcited by 722
  3. 2020SummEval: Re-evaluating Summarization Evaluationcited by 674
  4. 2023Prometheus: Inducing Fine-grained Evaluation Capability in Language Modelscited by 575
  5. 2024RewardBench: Evaluating Reward Models for Language Modelingcited by 499
  6. 2024Prometheus 2: An Open Source Language Model Specialized in Evaluating Other Language Modelscited by 446
  7. 2019MoverScore: Text Generation Evaluating with Contextualized Embeddings and Earth Mover Distancecited by 418
  8. 2023JudgeLM: Fine-tuned Large Language Models are Scalable Judgescited by 367
  9. 2024Humans or LLMs as the Judge? A Study on Judgement Biasescited by 323
  10. 2023PandaLM: An Automatic Evaluation Benchmark for LLM Instruction Tuning Optimizationcited by 316
  11. 2023Evaluating Large Language Models at Evaluating Instruction Followingcited by 302
  12. 2022RARR: Researching and Revising What Language Models Say, Using Language Modelscited by 287
  13. 2022Re3: Generating Longer Stories With Recursive Reprompting and Revisioncited by 193
  14. 2020USR: An Unsupervised and Reference Free Evaluation Metric for Dialog Generationcited by 188
  15. 2023Generative Judge for Evaluating Alignmentcited by 169
  16. 2020BLEU might be Guilty but References are not Innocentcited by 110
  17. 2023RL4F: Generating Natural Language Feedback with Reinforcement Learning for Repairing Model Outputscited by 105
  18. 2023A Confederacy of Models: a Comprehensive Evaluation of LLMs on Creative Writingcited by 99
  19. 2023Verbosity Bias in Preference Labeling by Large Language Modelscited by 91
  20. 2023Exploring the Use of Large Language Models for Reference-Free Text Quality Evaluation: An Empirical Studycited by 85
  21. 2024Foundational Autoraters: Taming Large Language Models for Better Automatic Evaluationcited by 74
  22. 2024LLM-based NLG Evaluation: Current Status and Challengescited by 73
  23. 2024Self-Taught Evaluatorscited by 72
  24. 2023Style Over Substance: Evaluation Biases for Large Language Modelscited by 70
  25. 2023TIGERScore: Towards Building Explainable Metric for All Text Generation Taskscited by 70
  26. 2021OpenMEVA: A Benchmark for Evaluating Open-ended Story Generation Metricscited by 61
  27. 2020UNION: An Unreferenced Metric for Evaluating Open-ended Story Generationcited by 60
  28. 2022On the Limitations of Reference-Free Evaluations of Generated Textcited by 52
  29. 2024TLCR: Token-Level Continuous Reward for Fine-grained Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedbackcited by 43
  30. 2024Leveraging Large Language Models for NLG Evaluation: Advances and Challengescited by 37
  31. 2024Are LLM-based Evaluators Confusing NLG Quality Criteria?cited by 36
  32. 2023Beyond Imitation: Leveraging Fine-grained Quality Signals for Alignmentcited by 35
  33. 2022Achieving Reliable Human Assessment of Open-Domain Dialogue Systemscited by 31
  34. 2024Aligning Large Language Models via Fine-grained Supervisioncited by 13
  35. 2023Not All Metrics Are Guilty: Improving NLG Evaluation by Diversifying Referencescited by 11
  36. 2024Bridging and Modeling Correlations in Pairwise Data for Direct Preference Optimizationcited by 7
  37. 2024Is Reference Necessary in the Evaluation of NLG Systems? When and Where?cited by 6

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2024: 1; 2025: 10; 2026: 9.

20 papers.

Sort:

By area:

  1. 2024LLMs-as-Judges: A Comprehensive Survey on LLM-based Evaluation Methodscited by 465
  2. 2025A Survey on Test-Time Scaling in Large Language Models: What, How, Where, and How Well?cited by 223
  3. 2025Learning to Plan & Reason for Evaluation with Thinking-LLM-as-a-Judgecited by 78
  4. 2025No Free Labels: Limitations of LLM-as-a-Judge Without Human Groundingcited by 54
  5. 2025Spatial Reasoning in Multimodal Large Language Models: A Survey of Tasks, Benchmarks and Methodscited by 23
  6. 2025BizFinBench: A Business-Driven Real-World Financial Benchmark for Evaluating LLMscited by 22
  7. 2025ProactiveEval: A Unified Evaluation Framework for Proactive Dialogue Agentscited by 9
  8. 2026Rethinking LLM-as-a-Judge: Representation-as-a-Judge with Small Language Models via Semantic Capacity Asymmetrycited by 8
  9. 2025Graders should cheat: privileged information enables expert-level automated evaluationscited by 5
  10. 2025HPSS: Heuristic Prompting Strategy Search for LLM Evaluatorscited by 5
  11. 2025Enterprise Large Language Model Evaluation Benchmarkcited by 5
  12. 2026How Real is Your Jailbreak? Fine-grained Jailbreak Evaluation with Anchored Referencecited by 3
8 more
  1. 2026Beyond LLM-as-a-Judge: Deterministic Metrics for Multilingual Generative Text Evaluationcited by 3
  2. 2026When Vision-Language Models Judge Without Seeing: Exposing Informativeness Biascited by 3
  3. 2026References Improve LLM Alignment in Non-Verifiable Domainscited by 1
  4. 2025Learning to Align Multi-Faceted Evaluation: A Unified and Robust Frameworkcited by 0
  5. 2026Exploring the Effectiveness of Using LLMs for Automated Assessment of Student Self Explanations in Programming Educationcited by 0
  6. 2026Prompt Perturbation for Reliable LLM Evaluation over Comparison Graphscited by 0
  7. 2026LLM-Based Multi-Reference Evaluation for Efficient and Robust Assessment of Phrase Break Annotationscited by 0
  8. 2026Judges Follow the Reference: The Derivation Gap in Verifying Tool-Call Argumentscited by 0