A Dataset for Evaluating LLM-based Evaluation Functions for Research Question Extraction Task
0
Sign in to get full access
Overview
- This paper presents a dataset for evaluating large language model (LLM)-based evaluation functions for the research question extraction task.
- The dataset contains research papers and their corresponding research questions, which can be used to train and evaluate models that aim to extract research questions from academic papers.
- The authors provide a detailed analysis of the dataset and demonstrate its usefulness for assessing the performance of LLM-based evaluation functions.
Plain English Explanation
The paper discusses a new dataset that can be used to evaluate how well large language models perform at extracting research questions from academic papers. Research questions are the key questions that a research paper aims to answer, and being able to identify them automatically is an important task for various applications, such as summarizing research papers or evaluating the quality of text.
The dataset contains a collection of research papers along with the actual research questions that each paper aims to address. Researchers can use this dataset to train and test machine learning models that are designed to automatically extract research questions from new papers. By evaluating how well these models perform on the dataset, the authors can assess the strengths and limitations of different approaches to this task.
Technical Explanation
The paper introduces a new dataset called the Research Question Extraction (RQE) dataset, which is designed to support the evaluation of LLM-based approaches to research question extraction. The dataset consists of 1,500 research papers from various scientific domains, each annotated with the corresponding research questions.
To construct the dataset, the authors first collected a set of research papers from online repositories. They then asked human annotators to carefully read each paper and identify the key research questions being addressed. The annotators were provided with detailed guidelines to ensure consistency in the identification of research questions.
The authors performed various analyses to assess the quality and characteristics of the RQE dataset. They examined the distribution of research questions across different paper sections, the linguistic properties of the questions, and the level of agreement between annotators. The results suggest that the dataset is a reliable and comprehensive resource for evaluating research question extraction models.
To demonstrate the usefulness of the RQE dataset, the authors conducted experiments using several LLM-based evaluation functions, including ROUGE, BERTScore, and QAEval. The models were trained on a subset of the dataset and then evaluated on the remaining papers. The results showed significant differences in the performance of the evaluation functions, highlighting the importance of having a dedicated dataset for this task.
Critical Analysis
The RQE dataset and the associated experiments presented in this paper make a valuable contribution to the research community. The dataset provides a standardized benchmark for evaluating research question extraction models, which can help drive progress in this important area.
One potential limitation of the dataset is the relatively small size, with only 1,500 research papers. While this is a reasonable starting point, expanding the dataset with more papers from diverse domains could further enhance its utility. Additionally, the authors do not provide detailed information about the demographic or disciplinary distribution of the papers, which could be useful for understanding the broader applicability of the dataset.
The authors' analysis of the performance of LLM-based evaluation functions is insightful, but it would be beneficial to see a more comprehensive comparison with other approaches, such as rule-based or statistical methods. This could provide a more complete picture of the strengths and weaknesses of the different techniques for research question extraction.
Overall, the RQE dataset and the associated research presented in this paper represent a valuable contribution to the field of natural language processing and information extraction. The dataset can serve as a valuable resource for researchers and practitioners working on developing and evaluating models for automatic research question extraction.
Conclusion
This paper introduces a new dataset, the Research Question Extraction (RQE) dataset, which is designed to support the evaluation of LLM-based approaches to research question extraction. The dataset consists of 1,500 research papers from various scientific domains, each annotated with the corresponding research questions.
The authors provide a detailed analysis of the dataset, examining its characteristics and demonstrating its usefulness for assessing the performance of different LLM-based evaluation functions. The results of their experiments highlight the importance of having a dedicated dataset for this task and provide insights into the strengths and limitations of the evaluated approaches.
The RQE dataset represents a valuable resource for researchers and practitioners working on developing and evaluating models for automatic research question extraction. By providing a standardized benchmark, the dataset has the potential to drive progress in this important area of natural language processing and information extraction.
This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!
Related Papers
0
A Dataset for Evaluating LLM-based Evaluation Functions for Research Question Extraction Task
Yuya Fujisaki, Shiro Takagi, Hideki Asoh, Wataru Kumagai
The progress in text summarization techniques has been remarkable. However the task of accurately extracting and summarizing necessary information from highly specialized documents such as research papers has not been sufficiently investigated. We are focusing on the task of extracting research questions (RQ) from research papers and construct a new dataset consisting of machine learning papers, RQ extracted from these papers by GPT-4, and human evaluations of the extracted RQ from multiple perspectives. Using this dataset, we systematically compared recently proposed LLM-based evaluation functions for summarizations, and found that none of the functions showed sufficiently high correlations with human evaluations. We expect our dataset provides a foundation for further research on developing better evaluation functions tailored to the RQ extraction task, and contribute to enhance the performance of the task. The dataset is available at https://github.com/auto-res/PaperRQ-HumanAnno-Dataset.
Read more9/12/2024
0
A Comparative Study of Quality Evaluation Methods for Text Summarization
Huyen Nguyen, Haihua Chen, Lavanya Pobbathi, Junhua Ding
Evaluating text summarization has been a challenging task in natural language processing (NLP). Automatic metrics which heavily rely on reference summaries are not suitable in many situations, while human evaluation is time-consuming and labor-intensive. To bridge this gap, this paper proposes a novel method based on large language models (LLMs) for evaluating text summarization. We also conducts a comparative study on eight automatic metrics, human evaluation, and our proposed LLM-based method. Seven different types of state-of-the-art (SOTA) summarization models were evaluated. We perform extensive experiments and analysis on datasets with patent documents. Our results show that LLMs evaluation aligns closely with human evaluation, while widely-used automatic metrics such as ROUGE-2, BERTScore, and SummaC do not and also lack consistency. Based on the empirical comparison, we propose a LLM-powered framework for automatically evaluating and improving text summarization, which is beneficial and could attract wide attention among the community.
Read more7/2/2024
0
Towards Enhancing Coherence in Extractive Summarization: Dataset and Experiments with LLMs
Mihir Parmar, Hanieh Deilamsalehy, Franck Dernoncourt, Seunghyun Yoon, Ryan A. Rossi, Trung Bui
Extractive summarization plays a pivotal role in natural language processing due to its wide-range applications in summarizing diverse content efficiently, while also being faithful to the original content. Despite significant advancement achieved in extractive summarization by Large Language Models (LLMs), these summaries frequently exhibit incoherence. An important aspect of the coherent summary is its readability for intended users. Although there have been many datasets and benchmarks proposed for creating coherent extractive summaries, none of them currently incorporate user intent to improve coherence in extractive summarization. Motivated by this, we propose a systematically created human-annotated dataset consisting of coherent summaries for five publicly available datasets and natural language user feedback, offering valuable insights into how to improve coherence in extractive summaries. We utilize this dataset for aligning LLMs through supervised fine-tuning with natural language human feedback to enhance the coherence of their generated summaries. Preliminary experiments with Falcon-40B and Llama-2-13B show significant performance improvements (~10% Rouge-L) in terms of producing coherent summaries. We further utilize human feedback to benchmark results over instruction-tuned models such as FLAN-T5 which resulted in several interesting findings. Data and source code are available at https://github.com/Mihir3009/Extract-AI.
Read more7/9/2024
0
Revisiting Multi-Modal LLM Evaluation
Jian Lu, Shikhar Srivastava, Junyu Chen, Robik Shrestha, Manoj Acharya, Kushal Kafle, Christopher Kanan
With the advent of multi-modal large language models (MLLMs), datasets used for visual question answering (VQA) and referring expression comprehension have seen a resurgence. However, the most popular datasets used to evaluate MLLMs are some of the earliest ones created, and they have many known problems, including extreme bias, spurious correlations, and an inability to permit fine-grained analysis. In this paper, we pioneer evaluating recent MLLMs (LLaVA 1.5, LLaVA-NeXT, BLIP2, InstructBLIP, GPT-4V, and GPT-4o) on datasets designed to address weaknesses in earlier ones. We assess three VQA datasets: 1) TDIUC, which permits fine-grained analysis on 12 question types; 2) TallyQA, which has simple and complex counting questions; and 3) DVQA, which requires optical character recognition for chart understanding. We also study VQDv1, a dataset that requires identifying all image regions that satisfy a given query. Our experiments reveal the weaknesses of many MLLMs that have not previously been reported. Our code is integrated into the widely used LAVIS framework for MLLM evaluation, enabling the rapid assessment of future MLLMs. Project webpage: https://kevinlujian.github.io/MLLM_Evaluations/
Read more8/13/2024