{"about":{"site":"https://codewithpapers.app","non_affiliation":"Code with Papers and Syntology are not affiliated with, endorsed by, or sponsored by Papers with Code, Meta, or the pwc-archive mirror.","licence":"CC BY-SA 4.0","licence_url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/legalcode","attribution":"https://codewithpapers.app/attribution","modified":"archive material modified by Syntology; see the attribution page"},"url":"/paper/benchmarking-llms-judgments-with-no-gold","title":"Benchmarking LLMs' Judgments with No Gold Standard","arxiv_id":"2411.07127","date":"2024-11-11","proceeding":null,"authors":["Shengwei Xu","Yuxuan Lu","Grant Schoenebeck","Yuqing Kong"],"abstract":"We introduce the GEM (Generative Estimator for Mutual Information), an evaluation metric for assessing language generation by Large Language Models (LLMs), particularly in generating informative judgments, without the need for a gold standard reference. GEM broadens the scenarios where we can benchmark LLM generation performance-from traditional ones, like machine translation and summarization, where gold standard references are readily available, to subjective tasks without clear gold standards, such as academic peer review. GEM uses a generative model to estimate mutual information between candidate and reference responses, without requiring the reference to be a gold standard. In experiments on a human-annotated dataset, GEM demonstrates competitive correlations with human scores compared to the state-of-the-art GPT-4o Examiner, and outperforms all other baselines. Additionally, GEM is more robust against strategic manipulations, such as rephrasing or elongation, which can artificially inflate scores under a GPT-4o Examiner. We also present GRE-bench (Generating Review Evaluation Benchmark) which evaluates LLMs based on how well they can generate high-quality peer reviews for academic research papers. Because GRE-bench is based upon GEM, it inherits its robustness properties. Additionally, GRE-bench circumvents data contamination problems (or data leakage) by using the continuous influx of new open-access research papers and peer reviews each year. We show GRE-bench results of various popular LLMs on their peer review capabilities using the ICLR2023 dataset.","url_abs":"https://arxiv.org/abs/2411.07127v2","url_pdf":"https://arxiv.org/pdf/2411.07127v2.pdf","source":{"archive":"pwc-archive (Hugging Face), CC BY-SA 4.0","snapshot":"2025-07-28","licence_url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/legalcode","row_kind":"abstracts"},"code_links":[{"paper_slug":"benchmarking-llms-judgments-with-no-gold","repo_url":"https://github.com/yx-lu/benchmarking-llms--judgments-with-no-gold-standard","is_official":1,"mentioned_in_paper":1,"mentioned_in_github":0,"framework":"none","reach":{"status":"ok","spdx":"Apache-2.0"}}],"tasks":[{"task_slug":"benchmarking","task_name":"Benchmarking"},{"task_slug":"machine-translation","task_name":"Machine Translation"},{"task_slug":"text-generation","task_name":"Text Generation"}],"methods":[],"datasets_introduced":[],"methods_introduced":[],"results":[],"syntology":{"atlas_url":"https://app.syntology.ai/?focus=2411.07127","mcp":null,"developers":"https://syntology.ai/developers"},"arxiv_metadata":null,"syntology_extracted_results":null}