# Don't Count the Edits, Judge by the Outcome Alone: Reward-Based Evaluation for Grammatical Error Correction

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.15559 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.15559/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 20 of its 44 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 14 Sep 2026.

## Builds on (most cited first, 20 of 20)

- [Training language models to follow instructions with human feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.02155/) (2022)
- [Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arena](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.05685/) (2023)
- [Direct Preference Optimization: Your Language Model is Secretly a Reward Model](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.18290/) (2023)
- [BERTScore: Evaluating Text Generation with BERT](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1904.09675/) (2019)
- [Deep reinforcement learning from human preferences](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1706.03741/) (2017)
- [Learning to summarize from human feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2009.01325/) (2020)
- [G-Eval: NLG Evaluation using GPT-4 with Better Human Alignment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.16634/) (2023)
- [Fine-Tuning Language Models from Human Preferences](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1909.08593/) (2019)
- [DeBERTaV3: Improving DeBERTa using ELECTRA-Style Pre-Training with Gradient-Disentangled Embedding Sharing](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2111.09543/) (2021)
- [BLEURT: Learning Robust Metrics for Text Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2004.04696/) (2020)
- [COMET: A Neural Framework for MT Evaluation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2009.09025/) (2020)
- [BARTScore: Evaluating Generated Text as Text Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2106.11520/) (2021)
- [Is ChatGPT a Good NLG Evaluator? A Preliminary Study](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.04048/) (2023)
- [Towards a Unified Multi-Dimensional Evaluator for Text Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.07197/) (2022)
- [JFLEG: A Fluency Corpus and Benchmark for Grammatical Error Correction](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1702.04066/) (2017)
- [Is ChatGPT a Highly Fluent Grammatical Error Correction System? A Comprehensive Evaluation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.01746/) (2023)
- [Revisiting Grammatical Error Correction Evaluation and Beyond](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2211.01635/) (2022)
- [GPT-3.5 for Grammatical Error Correction](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.08469/) (2024)
- [Reference-less Measure of Faithfulness for Grammatical Error Correction](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1804.03824/) (2018)
- [gec-metrics: A Unified Library for Grammatical Error Correction Evaluation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.19388/) (2025)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Grammatical error correction (GEC) evaluation has traditionally relied on reference or edit overlap, which can penalize valid rewrites that differ from gold corrections. Reference-free metrics reduce this dependence, but evaluating whether a fluent output is a valid correction of the source remains challenging. We propose SURE, a source-conditioned reward evaluator trained on within-source preferences spanning minimal-edit and rewrite-oriented corrections. SURE jointly learns an overall reward with criteria-level supervision for grammaticality, faithfulness, and fluency, together with span-level grounding for source-side error resolution. Experiments on SEEDA show that SURE performs competitively against strong baselines, with particular gains on rewrite-style corrections and more disentangled criteria-level diagnostics. Our code is available at https://github.com/hayeonggg/SURE.