Skip to yearly menu bar Skip to main content


Poster

Prometheus: Inducing Fine-Grained Evaluation Capability in Language Models

Seungone Kim · Jamin Shin · yejin cho · Joel Jang · Shayne Longpre · Hwaran Lee · Sangdoo Yun · Ryan, S Shin · Sungdong Kim · James Thorne · Minjoon Seo

Halle B #231
[ ]
Fri 10 May 1:45 a.m. PDT — 3:45 a.m. PDT

Abstract:

Recently, GPT-4 has become the de facto evaluator for long-form text generated by large language models (LLMs). However, for practitioners and researchers with large and custom evaluation tasks, GPT-4 is unreliable due to its closed-source nature, uncontrolled versioning, and prohibitive costs. In this work, we propose PROMETHEUS a fully open-source LLM that is on par with GPT-4’s evaluation capabilities when the appropriate reference materials (reference answer, score rubric) are accompanied. For this purpose, we construct a new dataset – FEEDBACK COLLECTION – that consists of 1K fine-grained score rubrics, 20K instructions, and 100K natural language feedback generated by GPT-4. Using the FEEDBACK COLLECTION, we train PROMETHEUS, a 13B evaluation-specific LLM that can assess any given response based on novel and unseen score rubrics and reference materials provided by the user. Our dataset’s versatility and diversity make our model generalize to challenging real-world criteria, such as prioritizing conciseness, child-readability, or varying levels of formality. We show that PROMETHEUS shows a stronger correlation with GPT-4 evaluation compared to ChatGPT on seven evaluation benchmarks (Two Feedback Collection testsets, MT Bench, Vicuna Bench, Flask Eval, MT Bench Human Judgment, and HHH Alignment), showing the efficacy of our model and dataset design. During human evaluation with hand-crafted score rubrics, PROMETHEUS shows a Pearson correlation of 0.897 with human evaluators, which is on par with GPT-4-0613 (0.882), and greatly outperforms ChatGPT (0.392). Remarkably, when assessing the quality of the generated feedback, PROMETHEUS demonstrates a win rate of 58.62% when compared to GPT-4 evaluation and a win rate of 79.57% when compared to ChatGPT evaluation. Our findings suggests that by adding reference materials and training on GPT-4 feedback, we can obtain effective open-source evaluator LMs.

Chat is not available.