Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

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 2401.14640 v2 pith:7GPE4URL submitted 2024-01-26 cs.CL

Can LLMs Evaluate Complex Attribution in QA? Automatic Benchmarking using Knowledge Graphs

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

Attributed Question Answering (AQA) has attracted wide attention, but there are still several limitations in evaluating the attributions, including lacking fine-grained attribution categories, relying on manual annotations, and failing to compare attributions with only subtle differences. To bridge these gaps, we introduce Complex Attributed Question Answering (CAQA), a large-scale benchmark containing comprehensive attribution categories, automatically generated using Knowledge Graphs (KGs), and complex attribution scenarios. We have conducted extensive experiments to verify the effectiveness of CAQA, including the benchmarking of 25 automatic evaluators, their comparison with human evaluators, the testing of LLM evaluators fine-tuned by CAQA and so on. These experiments also lead to a series of important findings that can benefit the future research of AQA. All the codes and data are publicly accessible at https://github.com/HuuuNan/CAQA-Benchmark.

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Constructing Evaluation Datasets for Procedural Reasoning: Balancing Naturalness, Grounding, and Multi-Hop Coverage

    cs.AI 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 4.0

    Strict generation directly from Task-Method-Knowledge models yields 96.5% grounded and 92.6% usable QA pairs across 23 topics, outperforming transcript-first and TMK-aware alternatives on representational grounding.