REVIEW 4 cited by
Error Analysis Prompting Enables Human-Like Translation Evaluation in 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
Error Analysis Prompting Enables Human-Like Translation Evaluation in Large Language Models
read the original abstract
Generative large language models (LLMs), e.g., ChatGPT, have demonstrated remarkable proficiency across several NLP tasks, such as machine translation, text summarization. Recent research (Kocmi and Federmann, 2023) has shown that utilizing LLMs for assessing the quality of machine translation (MT) achieves state-of-the-art performance at the system level but \textit{performs poorly at the segment level}. To further improve the performance of LLMs on MT quality assessment, we investigate several prompting designs, and propose a new prompting method called \textbf{\texttt{Error Analysis Prompting}} (EAPrompt) by combining Chain-of-Thoughts (Wei et al., 2022) and Error Analysis (Lu et al., 2023). This technique emulates the commonly accepted human evaluation framework - Multidimensional Quality Metrics (MQM, Freitag et al. (2021)) and \textit{produces explainable and reliable MT evaluations at both the system and segment level}. Experimental Results from the WMT22 metrics shared task validate the effectiveness of EAPrompt on various LLMs, with different structures. Further analysis confirms that EAPrompt effectively distinguishes major errors from minor ones, while also sharing a similar distribution of the number of errors with MQM. These findings highlight the potential of EAPrompt as a human-like evaluator prompting technique for MT evaluation.
Forward citations
Cited by 4 Pith papers
-
The Prompt Report: A Systematic Survey of Prompt Engineering Techniques
This systematic survey organizes prompt engineering into a taxonomy of 58 LLM techniques and 40 others, supplies a shared vocabulary, and offers guidelines for state-of-the-art models.
-
LC-ICL: Label-Guided Contrastive In-Context Learning for Robust Information Extraction
LC-ICL improves few-shot NER and RE by using label-guided contrastive demonstrations that pair positive samples with error-annotated negative samples.
-
Large Language Models are not Fair Evaluators
LLMs show strong position bias when scoring model outputs, allowing easy manipulation of rankings, but calibration with multiple evidence, position balancing, and selective human input reduces this bias to better matc...
-
Calibrating Model-Based Evaluation Metrics for Summarization
A reference-free proxy scoring framework combined with GIRB calibration produces better-aligned evaluation metrics for summarization and outperforms baselines across seven datasets.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.