The integration of documents generated by LLMs themselves (Self-Docs) alongside retrieved documents has emerged as a promising strategy for retrieval-augmented generation systems. However, previous research primarily focuses on optimizing the use of Self-Docs, with their inherent properties remaining underexplored. To bridge this gap, we first investigate the overall effectiveness of Self-Docs, identifying key factors that shape their contribution to RAG performance (RQ1). Building on these insights, we develop a taxonomy grounded in Systemic Functional Linguistics to compare the influence of various Self-Docs categories (RQ2) and explore strategies for combining them with external sources (RQ3). Our findings reveal which types of Self-Docs are most beneficial and offer practical guidelines for leveraging them to achieve significant improvements in knowledge-intensive question answering tasks.

Evaluating and ranking the capabilities of different LLMs is crucial for understanding their performance and alignment with human preferences. Due to the high cost and time-consuming nature of human evaluations, an automatic LLM bencher (i.e., an automatic evaluation framework that aims to rank LLMs based on their alignment with human preferences) is indispensable. An automatic LLM bencher consists of four components: the input set (e.g., a user instruction), the evaluation model (e.g., an LLM), the evaluation type (e.g., pairwise comparison), and the aggregation method (e.g., the ELO rating system). However, previous work has not thoroughly explored how to select these components or how their different combinations influence the results. In this work, through controlled experiments, we provide a series of recommendations on how to choose each component to better automate the evaluation of LLMs. Furthermore, we discovered that when evaluating LLMs with similar performance, the performance of the automatic LLM bencher declines sharply, underscoring the limitations of current benchers and calling for future work. Lastly, we found that the evaluation models’ performance at the instance level (e.g., the accuracy of selecting the best output) does not always align with their effectiveness when used as a component of a bencher, highlighting the importance of dedicated system-level evaluation of benchers.

The correlation between NLG automatic evaluation metrics and human evaluation is often regarded as a critical criterion for assessing the capability of an evaluation metric. However, different grouping methods and correlation coefficients result in various types of correlation measures used in meta-evaluation. In specific evaluation scenarios, prior work often directly follows conventional measure settings, but the characteristics and differences between these measures have not gotten sufficient attention. Therefore, this paper analyzes 12 common correlation measures using a large amount of real-world data from six widely-used NLG evaluation datasets and 32 evaluation metrics, revealing that different measures indeed impact the meta-evaluation results. Furthermore, we propose three perspectives that reflect the capability of meta-evaluation: discriminative power, ranking consistency, and sensitivity to score granularity. We find that the measure using global grouping and Pearson correlation coefficient exhibits the best performance in both discriminative power and ranking consistency. Besides, the measures using system-level grouping or Kendall correlation are the least sensitive to score granularity.

Some prior work has shown that LLMs perform well in NLG evaluation for different tasks. However, we discover that LLMs seem to confuse different evaluation criteria, which reduces their reliability. For further verification, we first consider avoiding issues of inconsistent conceptualization and vague expression in existing NLG quality criteria themselves. So we summarize a clear hierarchical classification system for 11 common aspects with corresponding different criteria from previous studies involved. Inspired by behavioral testing, we elaborately design 18 types of aspect-targeted perturbation attacks for fine-grained analysis of the evaluation behaviors of different LLMs. We also conduct human annotations beyond the guidance of the classification system to validate the impact of the perturbations. Our experimental results reveal confusion issues inherent in LLMs, as well as other noteworthy phenomena, and necessitate further research and improvements for LLM-based evaluation.

The evaluation of natural language generation (NLG) tasks is a significant and longstanding research area. With the recent emergence of powerful large language models (LLMs), some studies have turned to LLM-based automatic evaluation methods, which demonstrate great potential to become a new evaluation paradigm following traditional string-based and model-based metrics. However, despite the improved performance of existing methods, they still possess some deficiencies, such as dependency on references and limited evaluation flexibility. Therefore, in this paper, we meticulously construct a large-scale NLG evaluation corpus **NLG-Eval** with annotations from both human and GPT-4 to alleviate the lack of relevant data in this field. Furthermore, we propose **Themis**, an LLM dedicated to NLG evaluation, which has been trained with our designed multi-perspective consistency verification and rating-oriented preference alignment methods. Themis can conduct flexible and interpretable evaluations without references, and it exhibits superior evaluation performance on various NLG tasks, simultaneously generalizing well to unseen tasks and surpassing other evaluation models, including GPT-4.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown superior performance in various applications and fields. To achieve better performance on specialized domains such as law and advertisement, LLMs are often continue pre-trained on in-domain data. However, existing approaches suffer from two major issues. First, in-domain data are scarce compared with general domain-agnostic data. Second, data used for continual pre-training are not task-aware, such that they may not be helpful to downstream applications. We propose TRAIT, a task-oriented in-domain data augmentation framework. Our framework is divided into two parts: in-domain data selection and task-oriented synthetic passage generation. The data selection strategy identifies and selects a large amount of in-domain data from general corpora, and thus significantly enriches domain knowledge in the continual pre-training data. The synthetic passages contain guidance on how to use domain knowledge to answer questions about downstream tasks. By training on such passages, the model aligns with the need of downstream applications. We adapt LLMs to two domains: advertisement and math. On average, TRAIT improves LLM performance by 8% in the advertisement domain and 7.5% in the math domain.

Chinese Spelling Check (CSC) aims to detect and correct error tokens in Chinese contexts, which has a wide range of applications. However, it is confronted with the challenges of insufficient annotated data and the issue that previous methods may actually not fully leverage the existing datasets. In this paper, we introduce our plug-and-play retrieval method with error-robust information for Chinese Spelling Check (RERIC), which can be directly applied to existing CSC models. The datastore for retrieval is built completely based on the training data, with elaborate designs according to the characteristics of CSC. Specifically, we employ multimodal representations that fuse phonetic, morphologic, and contextual information in the calculation of query and key during retrieval to enhance robustness against potential errors. Furthermore, in order to better judge the retrieved candidates, the n-gram surrounding the token to be checked is regarded as the value and utilized for specific reranking. The experiment results on the SIGHAN benchmarks demonstrate that our proposed method achieves substantial improvements over existing work.

In this study, we explored various neural machine translation techniques for the task of translating ancient Chinese into modern Chinese. Our aim was to find an effective method for achieving accurate and reliable translation results. After experimenting with different approaches, we discovered that the method of concatenating adjacent sentences yielded the best performance among all the methods tested.

Neural machine translation has achieved great success in the past few years with the help of transformer architectures and large-scale bilingual corpora. However, when the source text gradually grows into an entire document, the performance of current methods for document-level machine translation (DocMT) is less satisfactory. Although the context is beneficial to the translation in general, it is difficult for traditional methods to utilize such long-range information. Previous studies on DocMT have concentrated on extra contents such as multiple surrounding sentences and input instances divided by a fixed length. We suppose that they ignore the structure inside the source text, which leads to under-utilization of the context. In this paper, we present a more sound paragraph-to-paragraph translation mode and explore whether discourse structure can improve DocMT. We introduce several methods from different perspectives, among which our RST-Att model with a multi-granularity attention mechanism based on the RST parsing tree works best. The experiments show that our method indeed utilizes discourse information and performs better than previous work.

Previous studies on machine translation evaluation mostly focused on the quality of individual sentences, while overlooking the important role of contextual information. Although WMT Metrics Shared Tasks have introduced context content into the human annotations of translation evaluation since 2019, the relevant metrics and methods still did not take advantage of the corresponding context. In this paper, we propose a context-aware machine translation evaluation metric called Cont-COMET, built upon the effective COMET framework. Our approach simultaneously considers the preceding and subsequent contexts of the sentence to be evaluated and trains our metric to be aligned with the setting during human annotation. We also introduce a content selection method to extract and utilize the most relevant information. The experiments and evaluation of Cont-COMET on the official test framework from WMT show improvements in both system-level and segment-level assessments.