arXiv (All)
open access
Evaluating the Evaluator: Summarization Metrics and LLM-Judges beyond English
Automatic text summarization relies on automatic evaluation to quickly determine the quality of summarization models via automatic metrics and LLM-as-a-Judge models. However, these techniques require meta-evaluation to ensure that they capture human judgments correctly. In this paper, we explore thi
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- Evaluating the Evaluator: Summarization Metrics and LLM-Judges beyond English#919769
- Can We Trust the Judges? Validation of Factuality Evaluation Methods via Answer Perturbation#1109553
- Polaris: Learning to Generate Table Descriptions from Retrieval Feedback#463302
- Beyond Aggregate Scores: Behavioral Correctness Assumptions for Assessing Reference-Based Automatic Evaluation Methods#972225
- Granuscore: A Reference-Free Measure of Granularity for Text Analysis and Question Answering#652323
Record · ID 923998
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive