Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

PrExMe! Large Scale Prompt Exploration of Open Source LLMs for Machine Translation and Summarization Evaluation

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 2406.18528 v2 pith:Y3KXLAR5 submitted 2024-06-26 cs.CL

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

Large language models (LLMs) have revolutionized NLP research. Notably, in-context learning enables their use as evaluation metrics for natural language generation, making them particularly advantageous in low-resource scenarios and time-restricted applications. In this work, we introduce PrExMe, a large-scale Prompt Exploration for Metrics, where we evaluate more than 720 prompt templates for open-source LLM-based metrics on machine translation (MT) and summarization datasets, totalling over 6.6M evaluations. This extensive comparison (1) benchmarks recent open-source LLMs as metrics and (2) explores the stability and variability of different prompting strategies. We discover that, on the one hand, there are scenarios for which prompts are stable. For instance, some LLMs show idiosyncratic preferences and favor to grade generated texts with textual labels while others prefer to return numeric scores. On the other hand, the stability of prompts and model rankings can be susceptible to seemingly innocuous changes. For example, changing the requested output format from "0 to 100" to "-1 to +1" can strongly affect the rankings in our evaluation. Our study contributes to understanding the impact of different prompting approaches on LLM-based metrics for MT and summarization evaluation, highlighting the most stable prompting patterns and potential limitations.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

  1. PromptOptMe: Error-Aware Prompt Compression for LLM-based MT Evaluation Metrics

    cs.CL 2024-12 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    PromptOptMe compresses the inputs of the GEMBA-MQM MT evaluation prompt with a two-stage fine-tuned LLaMA 3.2 model, achieving a 2.37x token reduction without quality loss in the headline GPT-4o configuration.

  2. ScImage: How Good Are Multimodal Large Language Models at Scientific Text-to-Image Generation?

    cs.AI 2024-12 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    A human-scored benchmark shows that even GPT-4o averages below 4/5 correctness and all tested models struggle with scientific diagram prompts that combine spatial, numeric, and attribute requirements.

Pith tools