Recent advancements in LLMs on language modeling and emergent capabilities make them a promising reference-free evaluator of natural language generation quality, and a competent alternative to human evaluation. However, hindered by the closed-source or high computational demand to host and tune, there is a lack of practice to further calibrate an off-the-shelf LLM-based evaluator towards better human alignment. In this work, we propose AutoCalibrate, a multi-stage, gradient-free approach to automatically calibrate and align an LLM-based evaluator toward human preference. Instead of explicitly modeling human preferences, we first implicitly encompass them within a set of human labels. Then, an initial set of scoring criteria is drafted by the language model itself, leveraging in-context learning on different few-shot examples. To further calibrate this set of criteria, we select the best performers and re-draft them with self-refinement. Our experiments on multiple text quality evaluation datasets illustrate a significant improvement in correlation with expert evaluation through calibration. Our comprehensive qualitative analysis conveys insightful intuitions and observations on the essence of effective scoring criteria.
We're not able to analyze this paper right now due to high demand.
Please check back later (sorry!).
Sign up for a free account or log in to generate a summary of this paper:
We ran into a problem analyzing this paper.
Stanford alpaca: An instruction-following llama model. https://github.com/tatsu-lab/stanford_alpaca
Bertscore: Evaluating text generation with bert. In International Conference on Learning Representations, 2020. https://openreview.net/forum?id=SkeHuCVFDr.