# Integration of LLM Quality Assurance into an NLG System

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2501.16078 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.16078/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 7 of its 14 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 27 Jan 2025.

## Builds on (most cited first, 7 of 7)

- [CRITIC: Large Language Models Can Self-Correct with Tool-Interactive Critiquing](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.11738/) (2023)
- [Leak, Cheat, Repeat: Data Contamination and Evaluation Malpractices in Closed-Source LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.03927/) (2024)
- [Is ChatGPT a Highly Fluent Grammatical Error Correction System? A Comprehensive Evaluation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.01746/) (2023)
- [ChatGPT or Grammarly? Evaluating ChatGPT on Grammatical Error Correction Benchmark](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.13648/) (2023)
- [Read, Revise, Repeat: A System Demonstration for Human-in-the-loop Iterative Text Revision](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2204.03685/) (2022)
- [Exploring Effectiveness of GPT-3 in Grammatical Error Correction: A Study on Performance and Controllability in Prompt-Based Methods](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.18156/) (2023)
- [Underreporting of errors in NLG output, and what to do about it](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2108.01182/) (2021)

## Abstract (arXiv)

In this paper, we present a system that uses a Large Language Model (LLM) to perform grammar and spelling correction as a component of Quality Assurance (QA) for texts generated by NLG systems, which is important for text production in real-world scenarios. Evaluating the results of the system on work-in-progress sports news texts in three languages, we show that it is able to deliver acceptable corrections.