HackerPapers

arXiv:2305.06311cs.CL

Automatic Evaluation of Attribution by Large Language Models

Xiang Yue, Boshi Wang, Ziru Chen, Kai Zhang, Yu Su, Huan Sun

HN submission. Found in a submission link or body. Submitters do not count as commenters in the main ranking; a submission is not an endorsement.

Abstract

A recent focus of large language model (LLM) development, as exemplified by generative search engines, is to incorporate external references to generate and support its claims. However, evaluating the attribution, i.e., verifying whether the generated statement is fully supported by the cited reference, remains an open problem. Although human evaluation is common practice, it is costly and time-consuming. In this paper, we investigate the automatic evaluation of attribution given by LLMs. We begin by defining different types of attribution errors, and then explore two approaches for automatic evaluation: prompting LLMs and fine-tuning smaller LMs. The fine-tuning data is repurposed from related tasks such as question answering, fact-checking, natural language inference, and summarization. We manually curate a set of test examples covering 12 domains from a generative search engine, New Bing. Our results on this curated test set and simulated examples from existing benchmarks highlight both promising signals and challenges. We hope our problem formulation, testbeds, and findings will help lay the foundation for future studies on this important problem.

arXiv comments
EMNLP 2023 Findings
Journal reference
DOI
Subjects
cs.CLComputation and Language

On Hacker News

No comments linking this paper were found in the collected sources. Found in 1 HN submission from Feb 2024 to Feb 2024. Open submission discussions.

Comments linking this paper, per year.

Discussed in comments0 threads

No comments linking this paper were found in the collected sources. Open submission discussions.

Submitted to Hacker News

  • How does one detect hallucinations?

    Hallucinations are an interesting artifact of LLMs where the model tends to make up facts or generate outputs that are not factually correct. There are two broad approaches for detecting hallucinations: 1. Verify the correctness of the response against world knowledge (via Google/Bing search) 2. Verify the groundedness of the response against the information present in the retrieved context The 2nd approach is more interesting and useful as the majority of LLM applications have an RAG…

Connected through shared HN threads, not inferred similarity or a recommendation.