The Alternative Annotator Test for LLM-as-a-Judge: How to Statistically Justify Replacing Human Annotators with LLMs

The "LLM-as-a-judge" paradigm employs Large Language Models (LLMs) as annotators and evaluators in tasks traditionally performed by humans. LLM annotations are widely used, not only in NLP research but also in fields like medicine, psychology, and social science. Despite their role in shaping study results and insights, there is no standard or rigorous procedure to determine whether LLMs can replace human annotators. In this paper, we propose a novel statistical procedure -- the Alternative Annotator Test (alt-test) -- that requires only a modest subset of annotated examples to justify using LLM annotations. Additionally, we introduce a versatile and interpretable measure for comparing LLM judges. To demonstrate our procedure, we curated a diverse collection of ten datasets, consisting of language and vision-language tasks, and conducted experiments with six LLMs and four prompting techniques. Our results show that LLMs can sometimes replace humans with closed-source LLMs (such as GPT-4o), outperforming open-source LLMs, and that prompting techniques yield judges of varying quality. We hope this study encourages more rigorous and reliable practices.

Are LLMs Better than Reported? Detecting Label Errors and Mitigating Their Effect on Model Performance

NLP benchmarks rely on standardized datasets for training and evaluating models and are crucial for advancing the field. Traditionally, expert annotations ensure high-quality labels; however, the cost of expert annotation does not scale well with the growing demand for larger datasets required by modern models. While crowd-sourcing provides a more scalable solution, it often comes at the expense of annotation precision and consistency. Recent advancements in large language models (LLMs) offer new opportunities to enhance the annotation process, particularly for detecting label errors in existing datasets. In this work, we consider the recent approach of LLM-as-a-judge, leveraging an ensemble of LLMs to flag potentially mislabeled examples. Through a case study of four datasets from the TRUE benchmark, covering different tasks and domains, we empirically analyze the labeling quality of existing datasets, and compare expert, crowd-sourced, and our LLM-based annotations in terms of agreement, label quality, and efficiency, demonstrating the strengths and limitations of each annotation method. Our findings reveal a substantial number of label errors, which, when corrected, induce a significant upward shift in reported model performance. This suggests that many of the LLMs so-called mistakes are due to label errors rather than genuine model failures. Additionally, we discuss the implications of mislabeled data and propose methods to mitigate them in training to improve model performance.

NL-Eye: Abductive NLI for Images

Will a Visual Language Model (VLM)-based bot warn us about slipping if it detects a wet floor? Recent VLMs have demonstrated impressive capabilities, yet their ability to infer outcomes and causes remains underexplored. To address this, we introduce NL-Eye, a benchmark designed to assess VLMs' visual abductive reasoning skills. NL-Eye adapts the abductive Natural Language Inference (NLI) task to the visual domain, requiring models to evaluate the plausibility of hypothesis images based on a premise image and explain their decisions. NL-Eye consists of 350 carefully curated triplet examples (1,050 images) spanning diverse reasoning categories: physical, functional, logical, emotional, cultural, and social. The data curation process involved two steps - writing textual descriptions and generating images using text-to-image models, both requiring substantial human involvement to ensure high-quality and challenging scenes. Our experiments show that VLMs struggle significantly on NL-Eye, often performing at random baseline levels, while humans excel in both plausibility prediction and explanation quality. This demonstrates a deficiency in the abductive reasoning capabilities of modern VLMs. NL-Eye represents a crucial step toward developing VLMs capable of robust multimodal reasoning for real-world applications, including accident-prevention bots and generated video verification.

On Behalf of the Stakeholders: Trends in NLP Model Interpretability in the Era of LLMs

Recent advancements in NLP systems, particularly with the introduction of LLMs, have led to widespread adoption of these systems by a broad spectrum of users across various domains, impacting decision-making, the job market, society, and scientific research. This surge in usage has led to an explosion in NLP model interpretability and analysis research, accompanied by numerous technical surveys. Yet, these surveys often overlook the needs and perspectives of explanation stakeholders. In this paper, we address three fundamental questions: Why do we need interpretability, what are we interpreting, and how? By exploring these questions, we examine existing interpretability paradigms, their properties, and their relevance to different stakeholders. We further explore the practical implications of these paradigms by analyzing trends from the past decade across multiple research fields. To this end, we retrieved thousands of papers and employed an LLM to characterize them. Our analysis reveals significant disparities between NLP developers and non-developer users, as well as between research fields, underscoring the diverse needs of stakeholders. For example, explanations of internal model components are rarely used outside the NLP field. We hope this paper informs the future design, development, and application of methods that align with the objectives and requirements of various stakeholders.

The Colorful Future of LLMs: Evaluating and Improving LLMs as Emotional Supporters for Queer Youth

Queer youth face increased mental health risks, such as depression, anxiety, and suicidal ideation. Hindered by negative stigma, they often avoid seeking help and rely on online resources, which may provide incompatible information. Although access to a supportive environment and reliable information is invaluable, many queer youth worldwide have no access to such support. However, this could soon change due to the rapid adoption of Large Language Models (LLMs) such as ChatGPT. This paper aims to comprehensively explore the potential of LLMs to revolutionize emotional support for queers. To this end, we conduct a qualitative and quantitative analysis of LLM's interactions with queer-related content. To evaluate response quality, we develop a novel ten-question scale that is inspired by psychological standards and expert input. We apply this scale to score several LLMs and human comments to posts where queer youth seek advice and share experiences. We find that LLM responses are supportive and inclusive, outscoring humans. However, they tend to be generic, not empathetic enough, and lack personalization, resulting in nonreliable and potentially harmful advice. We discuss these challenges, demonstrate that a dedicated prompt can improve the performance, and propose a blueprint of an LLM-supporter that actively (but sensitively) seeks user context to provide personalized, empathetic, and reliable responses. Our annotated dataset is available for further research.

Faithful Explanations of Black-box NLP Models Using LLM-generated Counterfactuals

Causal explanations of the predictions of NLP systems are essential to ensure safety and establish trust. Yet, existing methods often fall short of explaining model predictions effectively or efficiently and are often model-specific. In this paper, we address model-agnostic explanations, proposing two approaches for counterfactual (CF) approximation. The first approach is CF generation, where a large language model (LLM) is prompted to change a specific text concept while keeping confounding concepts unchanged. While this approach is demonstrated to be very effective, applying LLM at inference-time is costly. We hence present a second approach based on matching, and propose a method that is guided by an LLM at training-time and learns a dedicated embedding space. This space is faithful to a given causal graph and effectively serves to identify matches that approximate CFs. After showing theoretically that approximating CFs is required in order to construct faithful explanations, we benchmark our approaches and explain several models, including LLMs with billions of parameters. Our empirical results demonstrate the excellent performance of CF generation models as model-agnostic explainers. Moreover, our matching approach, which requires far less test-time resources, also provides effective explanations, surpassing many baselines. We also find that Top-K techniques universally improve every tested method. Finally, we showcase the potential of LLMs in constructing new benchmarks for model explanation and subsequently validate our conclusions. Our work illuminates new pathways for efficient and accurate approaches to interpreting NLP systems.

Measuring the Robustness of Natural Language Processing Models to Domain Shifts

Large Language Models have shown promising performance on various tasks, including fine-tuning, few-shot learning, and zero-shot learning. However, their performance on domains without labeled data still lags behind those with labeled data, which we refer as the Domain Robustness (DR) challenge. Existing research on DR suffers from disparate setups, lack of evaluation task variety, and reliance on challenge sets. In this paper, we explore the DR challenge of both fine-tuned and few-shot learning models in natural domain shift settings. We introduce a DR benchmark comprising diverse NLP tasks, including sentence and token-level classification, QA, and generation, each task consists of several domains. We propose two views of the DR challenge: Source Drop (SD) and Target Drop (TD), which alternate between the source and target in-domain performance as reference points. We find that in significant proportions of domain shifts, either SD or TD is positive, but not both, emphasizing the importance of considering both measures as diagnostic tools. Our experimental results demonstrate the persistent existence of the DR challenge in both fine-tuning and few-shot learning models, though it is less pronounced in the latter. We also find that increasing the fine-tuned model size improves performance, particularly in classification.

A Systematic Study of Knowledge Distillation for Natural Language Generation with Pseudo-Target Training

Modern Natural Language Generation (NLG) models come with massive computational and storage requirements. In this work, we study the potential of compressing them, which is crucial for real-world applications serving millions of users. We focus on Knowledge Distillation (KD) techniques, in which a small student model learns to imitate a large teacher model, allowing to transfer knowledge from the teacher to the student. In contrast to much of the previous work, our goal is to optimize the model for a specific NLG task and a specific dataset. Typically, in real-world applications, in addition to labeled data there is abundant unlabeled task-specific data, which is crucial for attaining high compression rates via KD. In this work, we conduct a systematic study of task-specific KD techniques for various NLG tasks under realistic assumptions. We discuss the special characteristics of NLG distillation and particularly the exposure bias problem. Following, we derive a family of Pseudo-Target (PT) augmentation methods, substantially extending prior work on sequence-level KD. We propose the Joint-Teaching method for NLG distillation, which applies word-level KD to multiple PTs generated by both the teacher and the student. Our study provides practical model design observations and demonstrates the effectiveness of PT training for task-specific KD in NLG.

A Picture May Be Worth a Thousand Lives: An Interpretable Artificial Intelligence Strategy for Predictions of Suicide Risk from Social Media Images

The promising research on Artificial Intelligence usages in suicide prevention has principal gaps, including black box methodologies, inadequate outcome measures, and scarce research on non-verbal inputs, such as social media images (despite their popularity today, in our digital era). This study addresses these gaps and combines theory-driven and bottom-up strategies to construct a hybrid and interpretable prediction model of valid suicide risk from images. The lead hypothesis was that images contain valuable information about emotions and interpersonal relationships, two central concepts in suicide-related treatments and theories. The dataset included 177,220 images by 841 Facebook users who completed a gold-standard suicide scale. The images were represented with CLIP, a state-of-the-art algorithm, which was utilized, unconventionally, to extract predefined features that served as inputs to a simple logistic-regression prediction model (in contrast to complex neural networks). The features addressed basic and theory-driven visual elements using everyday language (e.g., bright photo, photo of sad people). The results of the hybrid model (that integrated theory-driven and bottom-up methods) indicated high prediction performance that surpassed common bottom-up algorithms, thus providing a first proof that images (alone) can be leveraged to predict validated suicide risk. Corresponding with the lead hypothesis, at-risk users had images with increased negative emotions and decreased belonginess. The results are discussed in the context of non-verbal warning signs of suicide. Notably, the study illustrates the advantages of hybrid models in such complicated tasks and provides simple and flexible prediction strategies that could be utilized to develop real-life monitoring tools of suicide.

A Functional Information Perspective on Model Interpretation

Contemporary predictive models are hard to interpret as their deep nets exploit numerous complex relations between input elements. This work suggests a theoretical framework for model interpretability by measuring the contribution of relevant features to the functional entropy of the network with respect to the input. We rely on the log-Sobolev inequality that bounds the functional entropy by the functional Fisher information with respect to the covariance of the data. This provides a principled way to measure the amount of information contribution of a subset of features to the decision function. Through extensive experiments, we show that our method surpasses existing interpretability sampling-based methods on various data signals such as image, text, and audio.