Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

Little Giants: Exploring the Potential of Small LLMs as Evaluation Metrics in Summarization in the Eval4NLP 2023 Shared Task

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2311.00686 v1 pith:J3APOBG7 submitted 2023-11-01 cs.CL

Little Giants: Exploring the Potential of Small LLMs as Evaluation Metrics in Summarization in the Eval4NLP 2023 Shared Task

classification cs.CL
keywords promptingtaskapproacheseval4nlpevaluationsharedsmalltechniques
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

This paper describes and analyzes our participation in the 2023 Eval4NLP shared task, which focuses on assessing the effectiveness of prompt-based techniques to empower Large Language Models to handle the task of quality estimation, particularly in the context of evaluating machine translations and summaries. We conducted systematic experiments with various prompting techniques, including standard prompting, prompts informed by annotator instructions, and innovative chain-of-thought prompting. In addition, we integrated these approaches with zero-shot and one-shot learning methods to maximize the efficacy of our evaluation procedures. Our work reveals that combining these approaches using a "small", open source model (orca_mini_v3_7B) yields competitive results.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Scoring, Reasoning, and Selecting the Best! Ensembling Large Language Models via a Peer-Review Process

    cs.CL 2025-12 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    LLM-PeerReview ensembles LLMs by scoring responses with LLM-as-Judge and selecting the best via averaging or truth inference, beating Smoothie-Global by 6.9-7.3 points on four datasets.

  2. LLMs-as-Judges: A Comprehensive Survey on LLM-based Evaluation Methods

    cs.CL 2024-12 accept novelty 3.0

    A survey that organizes LLMs-as-judges research into functionality, methodology, applications, meta-evaluation, and limitations.