Computational evaluation demonstrates automated assessment of explanation fidelity and interpretability in GPT-3.5, highlighting scalable methods for model safety.
As Large Language Models (LLMs) become more prevalent in various fields, it is crucial to rigorously assess the quality of their explanations. Our research introduces a task-agnostic framework for evaluating free-text rationales, drawing on insights from both linguistics and machine learning. We evaluate two dimensions of explainability: fidelity and interpretability. For fidelity, we propose methods suitable for proprietary LLMs where direct introspection of internal features is unattainable. For interpretability, we use language models instead of human evaluators, addressing concerns about subjectivity and scalability in evaluations. We apply our framework to evaluate GPT-3.5 and the impact of prompts on the quality of its explanations. In conclusion, our framework streamlines the evaluation of explanations from LLMs, promoting the development of safer models.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kuo et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: