REVIEW 2 cited by
MT-Eval: A Multi-Turn Capabilities Evaluation Benchmark for Large Language Models
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
read the original abstract
Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly relied upon for complex multi-turn conversations across diverse real-world applications. However, existing benchmarks predominantly focus on single-turn evaluations, overlooking the models' capabilities in multi-turn interactions. To address this gap, we introduce MT-Eval, a comprehensive benchmark designed to evaluate multi-turn conversational abilities. By analyzing human-LLM conversations, we categorize interaction patterns into four types: recollection, expansion, refinement, and follow-up. We construct multi-turn queries for each category either by augmenting existing datasets or by creating new examples with GPT-4 to avoid data leakage. To study the factors impacting multi-turn abilities, we create single-turn versions of the 1170 multi-turn queries and compare performance. Our evaluation of 11 well-known LLMs shows that while closed-source models generally surpass open-source ones, certain open-source models exceed GPT-3.5-Turbo in specific tasks. We observe significant performance degradation in multi-turn settings compared to single-turn settings in most models, which is not correlated with the models' fundamental capabilities. Moreover, we identify the distance to relevant content and susceptibility to error propagation as the key factors influencing multi-turn performance. MT-Eval is released publicly to encourage future research towards more robust conversational models.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
Towards Efficient and Effective Alignment of Large Language Models
A thesis presenting Lion, WebR, LTE, BMC, and FollowBench, five empirical methods that together address LLM alignment data, training, and evaluation.
-
ConsistencyChecker: Tree-based Evaluation of LLM Generalization Capabilities
ConsistencyChecker ranks LLMs by how well they survive chains of reversible transformations, and those scores track WMT 2024 translation quality rankings (r > 0.7) without using WMT paired data.
Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.