A Cost-Effective Framework to Evaluate LLM-Generated Relevance Judgements

Large Language Models (LLMs) hugely impacted many research fields, including Information Retrieval (IR), where they are used for many sub-tasks, such as query rewriting and retrieval augmented generation. At the same time, the research community is investigating whether and how to use LLMs to support, or even replace, humans to generate relevance judgments. Indeed, generating relevance judgements automatically - or integrating an LLM in the annotation process - would allow us to improve the number of evaluation collections, also for scenarios where the annotation process is particularly challenging. To validate relevance judgements produced by an LLM they are compared with human-made relevance judgements, measuring the inter-assessor agreement between the human and the LLM.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Published
2025-11-08
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1145/3746252.3761200
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Information Retrieval and Search Behavior
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
6.49
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

A Cost-Effective Framework to Evaluate LLM-Generated Relevance Judgements

Stefano Marchesin, Nicola Ferro, Guglielmo Faggioli, Simone Merlo
2 citations
Information Retrieval and Search Behavior
6.49
article

A Cost-Effective Framework to Evaluate LLM-Generated Relevance Judgements

Stefano Marchesin, Nicola Ferro, Guglielmo Faggioli, Simone Merlo
article en
2 citations

Abstract

Large Language Models (LLMs) hugely impacted many research fields, including Information Retrieval (IR), where they are used for many sub-tasks, such as query rewriting and retrieval augmented generation. At the same time, the research community is investigating whether and how to use LLMs to support, or even replace, humans to generate relevance judgments. Indeed, generating relevance judgements automatically - or integrating an LLM in the annotation process - would allow us to improve the number of evaluation collections, also for scenarios where the annotation process is particularly challenging. To validate relevance judgements produced by an LLM they are compared with human-made relevance judgements, measuring the inter-assessor agreement between the human and the LLM.

University of Padua (IT)
Openalex Percentile: Top 3%
Information Retrieval and Search Behavior
6.49
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.