# SAGEval: The frontiers of Satisfactory Agent based NLG Evaluation for reference-free open-ended text

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2411.16077 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2411.16077/

## Key facts

- Cited by 1 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in General LLM agent frameworks and benchmarks, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use.
- Builds on 24 of its 47 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 25 Nov 2024.

## Placed in

- LLM agents and tool use / [General LLM agent frameworks and benchmarks](https://mlsanity.com/agents/general-llm-agent-frameworks-and-benchmarks/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 24 of 24)

- [GPT-4 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.08774/) (2023)
- [Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2110.14168/) (2021)
- [Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Knowledge-Intensive NLP Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.11401/) (2020)
- [MetaGPT: Meta Programming for A Multi-Agent Collaborative Framework](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.00352/) (2023)
- [MM-Vet: Evaluating Large Multimodal Models for Integrated Capabilities](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.02490/) (2023)
- [Large Language Models are not Fair Evaluators](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.17926/) (2023)
- [ChatEval: Towards Better LLM-based Evaluators through Multi-Agent Debate](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.07201/) (2023)
- [Can Large Language Models Be an Alternative to Human Evaluations?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.01937/) (2023)
- [LLM Evaluators Recognize and Favor Their Own Generations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.13076/) (2024)
- [SummEval: Re-evaluating Summarization Evaluation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2007.12626/) (2020)
- [AgentVerse: Facilitating Multi-Agent Collaboration and Exploring Emergent Behaviors](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.10848/) (2023)
- [Is ChatGPT a General-Purpose Natural Language Processing Task Solver?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.06476/) (2023)
- [Is ChatGPT a Good NLG Evaluator? A Preliminary Study](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.04048/) (2023)
- [Asking and Answering Questions to Evaluate the Factual Consistency of Summaries](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2004.04228/) (2020)
- [MEGA: Multilingual Evaluation of Generative AI](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.12528/) (2023)
- [Branch-Solve-Merge Improves Large Language Model Evaluation and Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.15123/) (2023)
- [Are Large Language Model-based Evaluators the Solution to Scaling Up Multilingual Evaluation?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.07462/) (2023)
- [Exploring the Use of Large Language Models for Reference-Free Text Quality Evaluation: An Empirical Study](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.00723/) (2023)
- [MetaAgents: Large Language Model Based Agents for Decision-Making on Teaming](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.06500/) (2023)
- [OpenMEVA: A Benchmark for Evaluating Open-ended Story Generation Metrics](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2105.08920/) (2021)
- [ToolNet: Connecting Large Language Models with Massive Tools via Tool Graph](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.00839/) (2024)
- [MEGAVERSE: Benchmarking Large Language Models Across Languages, Modalities, Models and Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.07463/) (2023)
- [X-Eval: Generalizable Multi-aspect Text Evaluation via Augmented Instruction Tuning with Auxiliary Evaluation Aspects](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.08788/) (2023)
- [MATEval: A Multi-Agent Discussion Framework for Advancing Open-Ended Text Evaluation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.19305/) (2024)

## Built on by (most cited first, 1 of 1)

- [Agent-as-a-Judge](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.05111/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Large Language Model (LLM) integrations into applications like Microsoft365 suite and Google Workspace for creating/processing documents, emails, presentations, etc. has led to considerable enhancements in productivity and time savings. But as these integrations become more more complex, it is paramount to ensure that the quality of output from the LLM-integrated applications are relevant and appropriate for use. Identifying the need to develop robust evaluation approaches for natural language generation, wherein references/ground labels doesn't exist or isn't amply available, this paper introduces a novel framework called "SAGEval" which utilizes a critiquing Agent to provide feedback on scores generated by LLM evaluators. We show that the critiquing Agent is able to rectify scores from LLM evaluators, in absence of references/ground-truth labels, thereby reducing the need for labeled data even for complex NLG evaluation scenarios, like the generation of JSON-structured forms/surveys with responses in different styles like multiple choice, likert ratings, single choice questions, etc.