Paper
Length-Controlled AlpacaEval: A Simple Way to Debias Automatic Evaluators
Authors
Yann Dubois, Balázs Galambosi, Percy Liang, Tatsunori B. Hashimoto
Abstract
LLM-based auto-annotators have become a key component of the LLM development
process due to their cost-effectiveness and scalability compared to human-based
evaluation. However, these auto-annotators can introduce biases that are hard
to remove. Even simple, known confounders such as preference for longer outputs
remain in existing automated evaluation metrics. We propose a simple regression
analysis approach for controlling biases in auto-evaluations. As a real case
study, we focus on reducing the length bias of AlpacaEval, a fast and
affordable benchmark for instruction-tuned LLMs that uses LLMs to estimate
response quality. Despite being highly correlated with human preferences,
AlpacaEval is known to favor models that generate longer outputs. We introduce
a length-controlled AlpacaEval that aims to answer the counterfactual question:
"What would the preference be if the model's and baseline's output had the same
length?" To achieve this, we first fit a generalized linear model to predict
the biased auto-annotator's preferences based on the mediators we want to
control for (length difference) and other relevant features. We then obtain
length-controlled preferences by predicting preferences while conditioning the
GLM with a zero difference in lengths. Length-controlling not only improves the
robustness of the metric to manipulations in model verbosity, but we also find
that it increases the Spearman correlation with LMSYS Chatbot Arena from 0.94
to 0.98.