Wuqiong Luo

Bo Hu, Han Yuan, Vlad Pandelea et al.

The rapid advancement of large language models (LLMs) has sparked widespread adoption across diverse applications, making robust evaluation frameworks crucial for assessing their performance. While conventional evaluation metrics remain applicable for shorter texts, their efficacy diminishes when evaluating the quality of long-form answers. This limitation is particularly critical in real-world scenarios involving extended questions, extensive context, and long-form answers, such as financial analysis or regulatory compliance. In this paper, we use a practical financial use case to illustrate applications that handle "long question-context-answer triplets". We construct a real-world financial dataset comprising long triplets and demonstrate the inadequacies of traditional metrics. To address this, we propose an effective Extract, Match, and Score (EMS) evaluation approach tailored to the complexities of long-form LLMs' outputs, providing practitioners with a reliable methodology for assessing LLMs' performance in complex real-world scenarios.

Han Yuan, Yue Zhao, Li Zhang et al.

Structured output from large language models (LLMs) has enhanced efficiency in processing generated information and is increasingly adopted in industrial applications. Prior studies have investigated the impact of structured output on LLMs' generation quality, often presenting one-way findings. Some suggest that structured format enhances completeness and factual accuracy, while others argue that it restricts the reasoning capacity of LLMs and leads to reductions in standard evaluation metrics. Potential limitations of these assessments include restricted testing scenarios, weakly controlled comparative settings, and reliance on coarse metrics. In this work, we present a refined analysis using causal inference. Based on one assumed and two guaranteed constraints, we derive five potential causal structures characterizing the influence of structured output on LLMs' generation: (1) collider without m-bias, (2) collider with m-bias, (3) single cause from instruction, (4) single cause from output format, and (5) independence. Across seven public and one developed reasoning tasks, we find that coarse metrics report positive, negative, or neutral effects of structured output on GPT-4o's generation. However, causal inference reveals no causal impact in 43 out of 48 scenarios. In the remaining 5, 3 involve multifaceted causal structures influenced by concrete instructions.