Mitigating the Bias of Large Language Model Evaluation
<|reference_start|>Mitigating the Bias of Large Language Model Evaluation: Recently, there has been a trend of evaluating the Large Language Model (LLM) quality in the flavor of LLM-as-a-Judge, namely leveraging another LLM to evaluate the current output quality. However, existing judges are proven to be biased, namely they would favor answers which present better superficial quality (such as verbosity, fluency) while ignoring the instruction following ability. In this work, we propose systematic research about the bias of LLM-as-a-Judge. Specifically, for closed-source judge models, we apply calibration to mitigate the significance of superficial quality, both on probability level and prompt level. For open-source judge models, we propose to mitigate the bias by contrastive training, with curated negative samples that deviate from instruction but present better superficial quality. We apply our methods on the bias evaluation benchmark, and experiment results show our methods mitigate the bias by a large margin while maintaining a satisfactory evaluation accuracy.<|reference_end|>
@article{zhou2024mitigating,
    title={Mitigating the Bias of Large Language Model Evaluation},
    author={Hongli Zhou, Hui Huang, Yunfei Long, Bing Xu, Conghui Zhu, Hailong
  Cao, Muyun Yang and Tiejun Zhao},
    journal={arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.16788},
    year={2024},
    archivePrefix={arXiv},
    eprint={2409.16788},
    primaryClass={cs.CL}
}