use tinyllama to run evaluation, output metric will be named LLMeval_tinyllama

Evaluation

Output files

Example files generated for split dev using naver_splade-cocondenser-selfdistil as a retriever.

• config.yaml The parameters of the experiment in yaml format.
• eval_dev_generation_time.json The generation time in json format.
• eval_dev_metrics.json Generation evaluation metrics in json format.
• eval_dev_out.json Output of the generation, contains q_id (str), response (str) the generated response, label (list (str)) the answer reference (multiple possible), instruction (str) the instruction given to the generator, ranking_label (list(list(str)), optional) ids of reference paragraph (again multiple references possible).
• run.retrieve.top_5.kilt_nq.dev.naver_splade-cocondenser-selfdistil.trec The retrieval run in trec format.
• eval_dev_ranking_metrics.json Retrieval evaluation metrics in json format.

Non-neural metrics will be calculated automatically. Neural metrics such as BEM and LLM need to be evoked seperately.

By default evaluate.py will scan all folders in experiments/ and evaluate them sequentially. To evaluate a single folder pass the folder using --folder. To avoid running out of memory either run BEM using --bem or run LLM using --llm . A csv file will automatically be saved to results/ containing the table in csv format.

When using --llm you have a choice on how you transform LLM predictions in the final score:

• directly check in the generated answer for the expepected label occurence (default Yes/No), and assign corresponding score (default 1/0), when no expected label is found, or more than one expected label is matched, we assign score -100 to the corresponding sample, such samples are excluded from the mean score computation
• rely on the logits assigned to the first token (not available with vllm generators): get values corresponding to the expected labels, normalize them to 1 (get probability distribution across possible labels p(label)); final score would correspond to Inline equation: $\sum_{label} score(label)*p(label)$ The choice of score interpretation is done via use_logits parameter specified at evaluation config file. Default value is set to True (corresponding to the second option)

python3 evaluate.py --experiments_folder experiments/ --llm_batch_size 16 --split 'dev' --llm

Similarly to --generator you can specify which LLM you are willing as first options of --llm, as well as short name at metrics naming (use the name of the configuration file as the name of the llm).

# use llama2-7b-chat to run evaluation, output metric will be named VLLMeval_l2_7b
python3 evaluate.py --experiments_folder experiments/ --llm_batch_size 16 --split 'dev' --llm  "vllm_llama-2-7b-chat" "l2_7b"

# use tinyllama to run evaluation, output metric will be named LLMeval_tinyllama
python3 evaluate.py --experiments_folder experiments/ --llm_batch_size 16 --split 'dev' --llm  "tinyllama-chat" "tinyllama"

# in default settings (with no arguments specified) we use SOLAR-107B for evaluation and output metric is named LLMeval
python3 eval.py --experiments_folder experiments/ --llm_batch_size 16 --split 'dev' --llm  

You can specify prompt and other parameters in the evaluation config file for --llm at config/evaluator directory. By default they rely on default_qa.yaml configuration which assigns binary (Yes/No) value to each triple of Question/Response/Gold Response. You can specify finer granularity options and prompt (aka rubrik section). See example of more fine-grained configuration at config/evaluator/default_multi_qa.yaml.

python3 eval.py --experiments_folder experiments/ --llm_batch_size 16 --split 'dev' --llm  --llm_prompt default_multi_qa

If you have local ollama server running, you can call models installed on this server as following:

python3 eval.py --experiments_folder experiments/ --llm_ollama "phi3:latest" --ollama_url "http://localhost:11434"   --llm_prompt default_multi_qa

Pairwise comparisons

Instead of computing an LLM eval score for a given run, you can compare two outputs using the same script and some additional arguments e.g.

python3 evaluate.py --llm --folder mistral_preds --opponent_folder llama_preds  --opponent_name llama
```
where both `mistral_preds` and `llama_preds` are output folders of bergen inferences.
This scripts uses an LLM (can be any LLM supported in bergen or gpt-4o) to compare the two sets of predictions and compute win/tie/lose rates against the opponent. Results are stored in the metrics file of the folder. The prompt used is the pairwise prompt in `config/default_qa.yaml`.

This approach does not use logits but rather the raw prediction of the LLMs (win, tie or lose).

In this setup note that:
    - A single experiment folder must be specified for `--folder` and `--opponent_folder`
    - the `opponent_name` is required