arXiv preprint ·
Pairing Expert Critique with LLM-Driven Refinement: An Iterative Approach for Curating Quality AI Evaluation Datasets
- Published
- Source
- arXiv preprint, posted before peer review
- Original
- Read it at arXiv
- Topics
Abstract
Evaluating and improving domain-specific LLM responses requires high-quality reference data and rubrics, yet expert authoring is slow and expensive, and synthetic datasets may fail to capture practitioner preferences unless they are grounded in expert judgment. We present SME-C (Subject Matter Expert Critique), a human-AI workflow that captures expertise through lightweight critiques of candidate responses and complements it with LLM-driven analysis and refinement to iteratively curate response datasets and evaluation rubrics. We validate SME-C in the domain of financial business briefs, collecting 3,853 critiques from 411 finance professionals on 520 queries across two survey rounds. We evaluate two LLM-driven refinement strategies: one guided by the experts' written critiques and one that infers critique solely from their preference votes. In a blind validation survey with 100 additional professionals, we found that both strategies significantly improved quality over the experts' top-ranked baseline responses. The gains were concentrated among weaker original responses, and the two strategies excelled in different ways: critique-based refinement produced more domain-grounded improvements, whereas vote-based refinement was more effective at identifying and removing irrelevant content. The resulting rubrics and refined dataset support reproducible offline evaluation and benchmarking of LLMs, suggesting that structured expert critique is a viable alternative to expert authoring for building high-quality, domain-specific evaluation resources more quickly, at scale, and at lower cost.
The authors’ abstract, as arXiv lists it. arXiv’s listings, abstracts included, are free for anyone to reuse.
Read it on ReadSearch
Each opens after you create an account, and brings you back to this paper.
More in Human-Computer Interaction
Palimpsestic Accountability in the US Federal AI Inventories
BobFlow: Towards Human-Agent Collaborative Data Science Using Dataflows
Agentic Path Maps: Exposing an Agent's Traversal Through the Garden of Forking Paths
Sure Enough to Share? Overconfidence in GenAI Video Discernment is Associated with Sharing Intentions
OmniScribble: Mixed-Initiative Authoring of Animated Sketches through Inspectable and Repairable AI Decisions
Get the few papers worth your time in Human-Computer Interaction every morning.
ReadSearch reads the new papers in your field each day and brings you the few worth reading, each with its key finding in a sentence.