Arrow Research search

Author name cluster

Cunxiang Wang

Possible papers associated with this exact author name in Arrow. This page groups case-insensitive exact name matches and is not a full identity disambiguation profile.

7 papers
2 author rows

Possible papers

7

AAAI Conference 2026 Conference Paper

UDA: Unsupervised Debiasing Alignment for Pair-wise LLM-as-a-Judge

  • Yang Zhang
  • Cunxiang Wang
  • Lindong Wu
  • Wenbo Yu
  • Yidong Wang
  • Guangsheng Bao
  • Jie Tang

Pairwise evaluation of Large Language Models (LLMs) is a common paradigm, but it is prone to preference bias, where judges systematically favor certain outputs, such as their own. This bias leads to inconsistent and skewed rankings across different judges. To address this, we first empirically demonstrate significant and heterogeneous biases in cross-model evaluations. We then propose UDA (Unsupervised Debiasing Alignment), a framework that reduces inter-judge disagreement by dynamically adjusting the Elo rating system. For each pairwise comparison, a compact neural network learns to adaptively set the K-factor and refine win probabilities. Crucially, UDA operates in a fully unsupervised manner, guided solely by the objective of minimizing the dispersion among the Elo trajectories of all judges. This forces an alignment towards a collective consensus, which serves as an unsupervised proxy for a more stable and reproducible evaluation. In addition, we provide theoretical motivation demonstrating how alignment towards a consensus can reduce aggregate system bias. Experiments show that UDA significantly reduces the inter-judge rating standard deviation by up to 63.4% and improves the average correlation with human judgments by 24.7%. Notably, UDA elevates the performance of poorly performing judges to achieve parity with high-quality ones, fostering a more robust and reliable evaluation ecosystem.

ICLR Conference 2025 Conference Paper

NovelQA: Benchmarking Question Answering on Documents Exceeding 200K Tokens

  • Cunxiang Wang
  • Ruoxi Ning
  • Boqi Pan
  • Tonghui Wu
  • Qipeng Guo
  • Cheng Deng 0001
  • Guangsheng Bao
  • Xiangkun Hu

Recent advancements in Large Language Models (LLMs) have pushed the boundaries of natural language processing, especially in long-context understanding. However, the evaluation of these models' long-context abilities remains a challenge due to the limitations of current benchmarks. To address this gap, we introduce NovelQA, a benchmark tailored for evaluating LLMs with complex, extended narratives. NovelQA, constructed from English novels, offers a unique blend of complexity, length, and narrative coherence, making it an ideal tool for assessing deep textual understanding in LLMs. This paper details the design and construction of NovelQA, focusing on its comprehensive manual annotation process and the variety of question types aimed at evaluating nuanced comprehension. Our evaluation of long-context LLMs on NovelQA reveals significant insights into their strengths and weaknesses. Notably, the models struggle with multi-hop reasoning, detail-oriented questions, and handling extremely long inputs, averaging over 200,000 tokens. Results highlight the need for substantial advancements in LLMs to enhance their long-context comprehension and contribute effectively to computational literary analysis.

ICLR Conference 2025 Conference Paper

SPaR: Self-Play with Tree-Search Refinement to Improve Instruction-Following in Large Language Models

  • Jiale Cheng
  • Xiao Liu 0036
  • Cunxiang Wang
  • Xiaotao Gu
  • Yida Lu
  • Dan Zhang
  • Yuxiao Dong
  • Jie Tang 0001

Instruction-following is a fundamental capability of language models, requiring the model to recognize even the most subtle requirements in the instructions and accurately reflect them in its output. Such an ability is well-suited for and often optimized by preference learning. However, existing methods often directly sample multiple independent responses from the model when creating preference pairs. Such practice can introduce content variations irrelevant to whether the instruction is precisely followed (e.g., different expressions about the same semantic), interfering with the goal of teaching models to recognize the key differences that lead to improved instruction following. In light of this, we introduce SPaR, a self-play framework integrating tree-search self-refinement to yield valid and comparable preference pairs free from distractions. By playing against itself, an LLM employs a tree-search strategy to refine its previous responses with respect to the instruction while minimizing unnecessary variations. Our experiments show that a LLaMA3-8B model, trained over three iterations guided by SPaR, surpasses GPT-4-Turbo on the IFEval benchmark without losing general capabilities. Furthermore, SPaR demonstrates promising scalability, greatly enhancing models like GLM-4-9B and LLaMA3-70B. We also identify how inference scaling in tree search would impact model performance. Our code and data are publicly available at https://github.com/thu-coai/SPaR.

TIST Journal 2024 Journal Article

A Survey on Evaluation of Large Language Models

  • Yupeng Chang
  • Xu Wang
  • Jindong Wang
  • Yuan Wu
  • Linyi Yang
  • Kaijie Zhu
  • Hao Chen
  • Xiaoyuan Yi

Large language models (LLMs) are gaining increasing popularity in both academia and industry, owing to their unprecedented performance in various applications. As LLMs continue to play a vital role in both research and daily use, their evaluation becomes increasingly critical, not only at the task level, but also at the society level for better understanding of their potential risks. Over the past years, significant efforts have been made to examine LLMs from various perspectives. This paper presents a comprehensive review of these evaluation methods for LLMs, focusing on three key dimensions: what to evaluate, where to evaluate, and how to evaluate. Firstly, we provide an overview from the perspective of evaluation tasks, encompassing general natural language processing tasks, reasoning, medical usage, ethics, education, natural and social sciences, agent applications, and other areas. Secondly, we answer the ‘where’ and ‘how’ questions by diving into the evaluation methods and benchmarks, which serve as crucial components in assessing the performance of LLMs. Then, we summarize the success and failure cases of LLMs in different tasks. Finally, we shed light on several future challenges that lie ahead in LLMs evaluation. Our aim is to offer invaluable insights to researchers in the realm of LLMs evaluation, thereby aiding the development of more proficient LLMs. Our key point is that evaluation should be treated as an essential discipline to better assist the development of LLMs. We consistently maintain the related open-source materials at: https://github.com/MLGroupJLU/LLM-eval-survey

ICLR Conference 2024 Conference Paper

PandaLM: An Automatic Evaluation Benchmark for LLM Instruction Tuning Optimization

  • Yidong Wang 0003
  • Zhuohao Yu 0001
  • Wenjin Yao
  • Zhengran Zeng
  • Linyi Yang
  • Cunxiang Wang
  • Hao Chen 0102
  • Chaoya Jiang

Instruction tuning large language models (LLMs) remains a challenging task, owing to the complexity of hyperparameter selection and the difficulty involved in evaluating the tuned models. To determine the optimal hyperparameters, an automatic, robust, and reliable evaluation benchmark is essential. However, establishing such a benchmark is not a trivial task due to the challenges associated with evaluation accuracy and privacy protection. In response to these challenges, we introduce a judge large language model, named PandaLM, which is trained to distinguish the superior model given several LLMs. PandaLM's focus extends beyond just the objective correctness of responses, which is the main focus of traditional evaluation datasets. It addresses vital subjective factors such as relative conciseness, clarity, adherence to instructions, comprehensiveness, and formality. To ensure the reliability of PandaLM, we collect a diverse human-annotated test dataset, where all contexts are generated by humans and labels are aligned with human preferences. Our findings reveal that PandaLM-7B offers a performance comparable to both GPT-3.5 and GPT-4. Impressively, PandaLM-70B surpasses their performance. PandaLM enables the evaluation of LLM to be fairer but with less cost, evidenced by significant improvements achieved by models tuned through PandaLM compared to their counterparts trained with default Alpaca's hyperparameters. In addition, PandaLM does not depend on API-based evaluations, thus avoiding potential data leakage.

NeurIPS Conference 2024 Conference Paper

RAGChecker: A Fine-grained Framework for Diagnosing Retrieval-Augmented Generation

  • Dongyu Ru
  • Lin Qiu
  • Xiangkun Hu
  • Tianhang Zhang
  • Peng Shi
  • Shuaichen Chang
  • Cheng Jiayang
  • Cunxiang Wang

Despite Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) has shown promising capability in leveraging external knowledge, a comprehensive evaluation of RAG systems is still challenging due to the modular nature of RAG, evaluation of long-form responses and reliability of measurements. In this paper, we propose a fine-grained evaluation framework, RAGChecker, that incorporates a suite of diagnostic metrics for both the retrieval and generation modules. Meta evaluation verifies that RAGChecker has significantly better correlations with human judgments than other evaluation metrics. Using RAGChecker, we evaluate 8 RAG systems and conduct an in-depth analysis of their performance, revealing insightful patterns and trade-offs in the design choices of RAG architectures. The metrics of RAGChecker can guide researchers and practitioners in developing more effective RAG systems.

NeurIPS Conference 2023 Conference Paper

Evaluating Open-QA Evaluation

  • Cunxiang Wang
  • Sirui Cheng
  • Qipeng Guo
  • Yuanhao Yue
  • Bowen Ding
  • Zhikun Xu
  • Yidong Wang
  • Xiangkun Hu

This study focuses on the evaluation of the Open Question Answering (Open-QA) task, which can directly estimate the factuality of large language models (LLMs). Current automatic evaluation methods have shown limitations, indicating that human evaluation still remains the most reliable approach. We introduce a new task, QA Evaluation (QA-Eval) and the corresponding dataset EVOUNA, designed to assess the accuracy of AI-generated answers in relation to standard answers within Open-QA. Our evaluation of these methods utilizes human-annotated results to measure their performance. Specifically, the work investigates methods that show high correlation with human evaluations, deeming them more reliable. We also discuss the pitfalls of current methods and methods to improve LLM-based evaluators. We believe this new QA-Eval task and corresponding dataset EVOUNA will facilitate the development of more effective automatic evaluation tools and prove valuable for future research in this area. All resources are available at https: //github. com/wangcunxiang/QA-Eval and it is under the Apache-2. 0 License.

v2026.09.13