Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) may generate text that lacks consistency with human knowledge, leading to factual inaccuracies or hallucination. Existing research for evaluating the factuality of LLMs involves extracting fact claims using an LLM and verifying them against a predefined fact source. However, these evaluation metrics are task-specific, and not scalable, and the substitutability of fact sources in different tasks is under-explored. To address these challenges, we categorize four available fact sources: human-written evidence, reference documents, search engine results, and LLM knowledge, along with five text generation tasks containing six representative datasets. Then, we propose UFO, an LLM-based unified and flexible evaluation framework to verify facts against plug-and-play fact sources. We implement five evaluation scenarios based on this framework. Experimental results show that for most QA tasks, human-written evidence and reference documents are crucial, and they can substitute for each other in retrieval-augmented QA tasks. In news fact generation tasks, search engine results and LLM knowledge are essential. Our dataset and code are available at https://anonymous.4open.science/r/UFO-813F.
Paper Type: long
Research Area: Resources and Evaluation
Contribution Types: Model analysis & interpretability, NLP engineering experiment, Publicly available software and/or pre-trained models
Languages Studied: English
0 Replies
Loading