Views
No views yet
@article{li2023generative,
title={Generative Judge for Evaluating Alignment},
author={Li, Junlong and Sun, Shichao and Yuan, Weizhe and Fan, Run-Ze and Zhao, Hai and Liu, Pengfei},
journal={arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.05470},
year={2023}
}openai/gpt-4-turbo-2024-04-09, with the following prompt:You are an expert, impartial judge tasked with evaluating the quality of responses generated by two AI assistants.
Think step by step, and evaluate the responses, <response1> and <response2> to the instruction, <instruction>. Follow these guidelines:
- Avoid any position bias and ensure that the order in which the responses were presented does not influence your judgement
- Do not allow the length of the responses to influence your judgement - a concise response can be as effective as a longer one
- Consider factors such as adherence to the given instruction, helpfulness, relevance, accuracy, depth, creativity, and level of detail
- Be as objective as possible
Make your decision on which of the two responses is better for the given instruction from the following choices:
If <response1> is better, use "1".
If <response2> is better, use "2".
If both answers are equally good, use "0".
If both answers are equally bad, use "0".
<instruction>
{INSTRUCTION}
</instruction>
<response1>
{RESPONSE1}
</response1>
<response2>
{RESPONSE2}
</response2>BAAI/bge-base-en-v1.5 with the intent categories from the dataset above, using contrastive learning with cosine similarity loss, and subsequently merging the resultant model with the base model at a 3:2 ratio.