We’re on a journey to advance and democratize artificial intelligence through open source and open science.

3 points•akamor•7 days ago•2 comments•

2 comments

iamoliver_tech7 days ago
How did you validate the LLM-as-judge for synthesis coherence? Did you spot-check its calls against human review at all, and how often did they disagree?
joewferrara7 days ago
Hey Oliver, thanks for the question! This is the PrivacyBench dataset maintainer here. The LLM-as-judge for synthesis coherence has been reviewed extensively by me. The privacy_bench_metrics evaluation code generates a report that has for each person in the data the mappings of that person's PII to the synthetic replacements as well as the LLM-as-judge's judgement for each replacement. That makes review easy and LLM-as-judge decisions look. Each decision the LLM-as-judge makes is binary (is the replacement coherent or not), so it is a strait-forward judgement for the LLM and it is easy for a human to review. All that being said, we're in the process of doing a more rigorous evaluation where we record humans judgements and compare them to the LLM-as-judge on a subset of the PrivacyBench data.

Read the full thread on Hacker News →

Related stories