Most research about natural language generation (NLG) relies on evaluation benchmarks with limited references for a sample, which may result in poor correlations with human judgements. The underlying reason is that one semantic meaning can actually be expressed in different forms, and the evaluation with a single or few references may not accurately reflect the quality of the model’s hypotheses. To address this issue, this paper presents a simple and effective method, named **Div-Ref**, to enhance existing evaluation benchmarks by enriching the number of references. We leverage large language models (LLMs) to diversify the expression of a single reference into multiple high-quality ones to cover the semantic space of the reference sentence as much as possible. We conduct comprehensive experiments to empirically demonstrate that diversifying the expression of reference can significantly enhance the correlation between automatic evaluation and human evaluation. This idea is compatible with recent LLM-based evaluation which can similarly derive advantages from incorporating multiple references. *We strongly encourage future generation benchmarks to include more references, even if they are generated by LLMs, which is once for all.* We release all the code and data at https://github.com/RUCAIBox/Div-Ref to facilitate research.

Standard automatic metrics, e.g. BLEU, are not reliable for document-level MT evaluation. They can neither distinguish document-level improvements in translation quality from sentence-level ones, nor identify the discourse phenomena that cause context-agnostic translations. This paper introduces a novel automatic metric BlonDe to widen the scope of automatic MT evaluation from sentence to document level. BlonDe takes discourse coherence into consideration by categorizing discourse-related spans and calculating the similarity-based F1 measure of categorized spans. We conduct extensive comparisons on a newly constructed dataset BWB. The experimental results show that BlonDe possesses better selectivity and interpretability at the document-level, and is more sensitive to document-level nuances. In a large-scale human study, BlonDe also achieves significantly higher Pearson’s r correlation with human judgments compared to previous metrics.

Many natural language processing tasks, e.g., coreference resolution and semantic role labeling, require selecting text spans and making decisions about them. A typical approach to such tasks is to score all possible spans and greedily select spans for task-specific downstream processing. This approach, however, does not incorporate any inductive bias about what sort of spans ought to be selected, e.g., that selected spans tend to be syntactic constituents. In this paper, we propose a novel grammar-based structured span selection model which learns to make use of the partial span-level annotation provided for such problems. Compared to previous approaches, our approach gets rid of the heuristic greedy span selection scheme, allowing us to model the downstream task on an optimal set of spans. We evaluate our model on two popular span prediction tasks: coreference resolution and semantic role labeling; and show improvements on both.