Ziche Liu

Guiming Hardy Chen, Shunian Chen, Ziche Liu et al.

Adopting human and large language models (LLM) as judges (a.k.a human- and LLM-as-a-judge) for evaluating the performance of LLMs has recently gained attention. Nonetheless, this approach concurrently introduces potential biases from human and LLMs, questioning the reliability of the evaluation results. In this paper, we propose a novel framework that is free from referencing groundtruth annotations for investigating Misinformation Oversight Bias, Gender Bias, Authority Bias and Beauty Bias on LLM and human judges. We curate a dataset referring to the revised Bloom's Taxonomy and conduct thousands of evaluations. Results show that human and LLM judges are vulnerable to perturbations to various degrees, and that even the cutting-edge judges possess considerable biases. We further exploit these biases to conduct attacks on LLM judges. We hope that our work can notify the community of the bias and vulnerability of human- and LLM-as-a-judge, as well as the urgency of developing robust evaluation systems.

Ziche Liu, Rui Ke, Yajiao Liu et al.

Data selection for fine-tuning large language models (LLMs) aims to choose a high-quality subset from existing datasets, allowing the trained model to outperform baselines trained on the full dataset. However, the expanding body of research lacks a clear, unified framework, and the variability in experimental settings complicates systematic comparisons. While existing surveys comprehensively overview the stages and methods of data selection, they often overlook an in-depth exploration of the fine-tuning phase. In this paper, we conduct a focused review of recent data selection techniques for fine-tuning LLMs, analyzing a dozen key studies. We introduce a novel three-stage scheme - comprising feature extraction, criteria design, and selector evaluation - to systematically categorize and evaluate these methods. Additionally, we propose a unified comparison approach that incorporates ratio-based efficiency and ranking-based feasibility metrics to address inconsistencies across experiments. Our findings reveal that methods emphasizing more targeted quality measurement achieve higher efficiency but at the cost of feasibility. Finally, we discuss trends and highlight four key challenges in fine-tuning data selection, offering potential directions for future research.