Language Complexity Measurement as a Noisy Zero-Shot Proxy for Evaluating LLM Performance
Abstract
Large Language Models (LLMs) have made significant strides in natural language generation but often face challenges in tasks requiring precise calculations and structural analysis. This paper investigates the performance of state-of-the-art LLMs on language complexity measurement tasks, through the computation of the LIX readability metric and Average Dependency Distance (ADD). Using Swedish high school and university-level essays, we evaluate the models' abilities to compute LIX scores and perform dependency parsing, comparing their results to established ground truths. Our findings reveal that while all models demonstrate some capacity for these tasks, ChatGPT-o1-mini performs most consistently, achieving the highest accuracy in both LIX computation and dependency parsing. Additionally, we observe a strong significant correlation -0.875 p 0.026 (N=6) between the models' accuracy in computing LIX and their overall performance on the Massive Multitask Language Understanding (MMLU) benchmark. These results suggest that language complexity measurement abilities can serve as a noisy zero-shot proxies for assessing the general capabilities of LLMs, providing a practical method for model evaluation without the need for extensive benchmarking datasets.
Community
Large Language Models (LLMs) have made
significant strides in natural language generation but often face challenges in tasks requiring precise calculations and structural analysis. This paper investigates the performance of
state-of-the-art LLMs on language complexity
measurement tasks, through the computation of
the LIX readability metric and Average Dependency Distance (ADD). Using Swedish high
school and university-level essays, we evaluate
the models’ abilities to compute LIX scores and
perform dependency parsing, comparing their
results to established ground truths. Our findings reveal that while all models demonstrate
some capacity for these tasks, ChatGPT-o1-
mini performs most consistently, achieving the
highest accuracy in both LIX computation and
dependency parsing. Additionally, we observe
a strong significant correlation -0.875 p 0.026
(N=6) between the models’ accuracy in computing LIX and their overall performance on
the Massive Multitask Language Understanding (MMLU) benchmark. These results suggest
that language complexity measurement abilities can serve as a noisy zero-shot proxies for
assessing the general capabilities of LLMs, providing a practical method for model evaluation
without the need for extensive benchmarking
datasets.
This is an automated message from the Librarian Bot. I found the following papers similar to this paper.
The following papers were recommended by the Semantic Scholar API
- When LLMs Struggle: Reference-less Translation Evaluation for Low-resource Languages (2025)
- BenchMAX: A Comprehensive Multilingual Evaluation Suite for Large Language Models (2025)
- DebateBench: A Challenging Long Context Reasoning Benchmark For Large Language Models (2025)
- MDEval: Evaluating and Enhancing Markdown Awareness in Large Language Models (2025)
- LLM-ProS: Analyzing Large Language Models' Performance in Competitive Problem Solving (2025)
- Comparative Analysis of Listwise Reranking with Large Language Models in Limited-Resource Language Contexts (2024)
- Evaluate Summarization in Fine-Granularity: Auto Evaluation with LLM (2024)
Please give a thumbs up to this comment if you found it helpful!
If you want recommendations for any Paper on Hugging Face checkout this Space
You can directly ask Librarian Bot for paper recommendations by tagging it in a comment:
@librarian-bot
recommend
Models citing this paper 0
No model linking this paper
Datasets citing this paper 0
No dataset linking this paper
Spaces citing this paper 0
No Space linking this paper
Collections including this paper 0
No Collection including this paper