Despite the advanced capacities of the state-of-the-art large language models (LLMs), they suffer from issues of hallucination, stereotype, etc. Preference models play an important role in LLM alignment, yet training preference models predominantly rely on human-annotated data. This reliance limits their versatility and scalability. In this paper, we propose learning the preference model for LLMs via automatic preference data generation (AutoPM). Our approach involves both In-Breadth Data Generation, which elicits pairwise preference data from LLMs following the helpful-honest-harmless (HHH) criteria, and In-Depth Data Generation, which enriches the dataset with responses spanning a wide quality range. With HHH-guided preference data, our approach simultaneously enables the LLMs to learn human preferences and align with human values. Quantitative assessments on five benchmark datasets demonstrate the reliability and potential of AutoPM, pointing out a more general and scalable way to improve LLM performance.

With the continuous emergence of Chinese Large Language Models (LLMs), how to evaluate a model’s capabilities has become an increasingly significant issue. The absence of a comprehensive Chinese benchmark that thoroughly assesses a model’s performance, the unstandardized and incomparable prompting procedure, and the prevalent risk of contamination pose major challenges in the current evaluation of Chinese LLMs. We present CLEVA, a user-friendly platform crafted to holistically evaluate Chinese LLMs. Our platform employs a standardized workflow to assess LLMs’ performance across various dimensions, regularly updating a competitive leaderboard. To alleviate contamination, CLEVA curates a significant proportion of new data and develops a sampling strategy that guarantees a unique subset for each leaderboard round. Empowered by an easy-to-use interface that requires just a few mouse clicks and a model API, users can conduct a thorough evaluation with minimal coding. Large-scale experiments featuring 23 Chinese LLMs have validated CLEVA’s efficacy.

Despite recent progress in open-domain dialogue evaluation, how to develop automatic metrics remains an open problem. We explore the potential of dialogue evaluation featuring dialog act information, which was hardly explicitly modeled in previous methods. However, defined at the utterance level in general, dialog act is of coarse granularity, as an utterance can contain multiple segments possessing different functions. Hence, we propose segment act, an extension of dialog act from utterance level to segment level, and crowdsource a large-scale dataset for it. To utilize segment act flows, sequences of segment acts, for evaluation, we develop the first consensus-based dialogue evaluation framework, FlowEval. This framework provides a reference-free approach for dialog evaluation by finding pseudo-references. Extensive experiments against strong baselines on three benchmark datasets demonstrate the effectiveness and other desirable characteristics of our FlowEval, pointing out a potential path for better dialogue evaluation.

Recent advances in large-scale pre-training provide large models with the potential to learn knowledge from the raw text. It is thus natural to ask whether it is possible to leverage these large models as knowledge bases for downstream tasks. In this work, we answer the aforementioned question in unsupervised knowledge-grounded conversation. We explore various methods that best elicit knowledge from large models. Our human study indicates that, though hallucinations exist, large models post the unique advantage of being able to output common sense and summarize facts that cannot be directly retrieved from the search engine. To better exploit such generated knowledge in dialogue generation, we treat the generated knowledge as a noisy knowledge source and propose the posterior-based reweighing as well as the noisy training strategy. Empirical results on two benchmarks show advantages over the state-of-the-art methods.