mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

ReIFE: Re-evaluating Instruction-Following Evaluation

arXiv 2410.07069 ↗First posted 9 Oct 2024cs.CL cs.AI cs.LGcited by 22

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

The automatic evaluation of instruction following typically involves using large language models (LLMs) to assess response quality. However, there is a lack of comprehensive evaluation of these LLM-based evaluators across two dimensions: the base LLMs and the evaluation protocols. Therefore, we present a thorough meta-evaluation of instruction following, including 25 base LLMs and 15 recently proposed evaluation protocols, on 4 human-annotated datasets, assessing the evaluation accuracy of the LLM-evaluators. Our evaluation allows us to identify the best-performing base LLMs and evaluation protocols with a high degree of robustness. Moreover, our large-scale evaluation reveals: (1) Base LLM performance ranking remains largely consistent across evaluation protocols, with less capable LLMs showing greater improvement from protocol enhancements; (2) Robust evaluation of evaluation protocols requires many base LLMs with varying capability levels, as protocol effectiveness can depend on the base LLM used; (3) Evaluation results on different datasets are not always consistent, so a rigorous evaluation requires multiple datasets with distinctive features. We release our meta-evaluation suite ReIFE, which provides the codebase and evaluation result collection for more than 500 LLM-evaluator configurations, to support future research in instruction-following evaluation.

Key facts. Cited by 22 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 31 of its 52 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 9 Oct 2024.

Builds on

31 of 52 references.

References · 31

  1. 2023GPT-4 Technical Reportcited by 18,132
  2. 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,712
  3. 2023Llama 2: Open Foundation and Fine-Tuned Chat Modelscited by 12,865
  4. 2022Self-Consistency Improves Chain of Thought Reasoning in Language Modelscited by 5,601
  5. 2022Constitutional AI: Harmlessness from AI Feedbackcited by 2,950
  6. 2023G-Eval: NLG Evaluation using GPT-4 with Better Human Alignmentcited by 2,205
  7. 2023Improving Factuality and Reasoning in Language Models through Multiagent Debatecited by 1,739
  8. 2023FActScore: Fine-grained Atomic Evaluation of Factual Precision in Long Form Text Generationcited by 1,259
  9. 2024Chatbot Arena: An Open Platform for Evaluating LLMs by Human Preferencecited by 1,151
  10. 2023Large Language Models are not Fair Evaluatorscited by 1,050
  11. 2021GLM: General Language Model Pretraining with Autoregressive Blank Infillingcited by 1,026
  12. 2023Quantifying Language Models' Sensitivity to Spurious Features in Prompt Design or: How I learned to start worrying about prompt formattingcited by 778
19 more
  1. 2023AlpacaFarm: A Simulation Framework for Methods that Learn from Human Feedbackcited by 738
  2. 2023Can Large Language Models Be an Alternative to Human Evaluations?cited by 729
  3. 2023ChatEval: Towards Better LLM-based Evaluators through Multi-Agent Debatecited by 724
  4. 2024Yi: Open Foundation Models by 01.AIcited by 706
  5. 2024LLM Evaluators Recognize and Favor Their Own Generationscited by 651
  6. 2023Prometheus: Inducing Fine-grained Evaluation Capability in Language Modelscited by 558
  7. 2024From Crowdsourced Data to High-Quality Benchmarks: Arena-Hard and BenchBuilder Pipelinecited by 484
  8. 2024Prometheus 2: An Open Source Language Model Specialized in Evaluating Other Language Modelscited by 431
  9. 2023PandaLM: An Automatic Evaluation Benchmark for LLM Instruction Tuning Optimizationcited by 311
  10. 2023Evaluating Large Language Models at Evaluating Instruction Followingcited by 290
  11. 2024HelpSteer2: Open-source dataset for training top-performing reward modelscited by 232
  12. 2024WildBench: Benchmarking LLMs with Challenging Tasks from Real Users in the Wildcited by 211
  13. 2022Revisiting the Gold Standard: Grounding Summarization Evaluation with Robust Human Evaluationcited by 141
  14. 2023PRD: Peer Rank and Discussion Improve Large Language Model based Evaluationscited by 114
  15. 2023Branch-Solve-Merge Improves Large Language Model Evaluation and Generationcited by 104
  16. 2023Wider and Deeper LLM Networks are Fairer LLM Evaluatorscited by 91
  17. 2023Benchmarking Generation and Evaluation Capabilities of Large Language Models for Instruction Controllable Summarizationcited by 69
  18. 2023Towards Interpretable and Efficient Automatic Reference-Based Summarization Evaluationcited by 24
  19. 2023CoAScore: Chain-of-Aspects Prompting for NLG Evaluationcited by 14

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2024: 3; 2025: 10; 2026: 9.

22 papers.

Sort:

By area:

  1. 2025Improving LLM-as-a-Judge Inference with the Judgment Distributioncited by 36
  2. 2025Does Context Matter? ContextualJudgeBench for Evaluating LLM-based Judges in Contextual Settingscited by 22
  3. 2026RubricEval: A Rubric-Level Meta-Evaluation Benchmark for LLM Judges in Instruction Followingcited by 19
  4. 2025SciArena: An Open Evaluation Platform for Non-Verifiable Scientific Literature-Grounded Taskscited by 17
  5. 2025How Many Instructions Can LLMs Follow at Once?cited by 17
  6. 2024Re-evaluating Automatic LLM System Ranking for Alignment with Human Preferencecited by 16
  7. 2024SciDQA: A Deep Reading Comprehension Dataset over Scientific Paperscited by 15
  8. 2025Multi2: Multi-Agent Test-Time Scalable Framework for Multi-Document Processingcited by 12
  9. 2024MDCure: A Scalable Pipeline for Multi-Document Instruction-Followingcited by 10
  10. 2025Revisiting Compositional Generalization Capability of Large Language Models Considering Instruction Following Abilitycited by 10
  11. 2026Time to REFLECT: Can We Trust LLM Judges for Evidence-based Research Agents?cited by 10
  12. 2025Do different prompting methods yield a common task representation in language models?cited by 9
10 more
  1. 2025When Models Can't Follow: Testing Instruction Adherence Across 256 LLMscited by 5
  2. 2025Do Before You Judge: Self-Reference as a Pathway to Better LLM Evaluationcited by 2
  3. 2025Artificial Impressions: Evaluating Large Language Model Behavior Through the Lens of Trait Impressionscited by 2
  4. 2026Neuro-Symbolic Verification on Instruction Following of LLMscited by 2
  5. 2026The Confident Liar: Diagnosing Multi-Agent Debate with Log-Probabilities and LLM-as-Judgecited by 1
  6. 2026Early-Token Confidence Predicts Reasoning Quality in Multi-Agent LLM Debatecited by 1
  7. 2026Are Aligned Large Language Models Still Misaligned?cited by 0
  8. 2026MCJudgeBench: A Benchmark for Constraint-Level Judge Evaluation in Multi-Constraint Instruction Followingcited by 0
  9. 2026RankJudge: A Multi-Turn LLM-as-a-Judge Synthetic Benchmark Generatorcited by 0
  10. 2026Instruction Quality Matters: Refining Instructions for Effective Preference Learningcited by 0