arXiv ScienceSearch

arXiv · 2502.00857

HintEval: An Open-Source Python Toolkit for Hint Generation and Hint Evaluation

Abstract

Large Language Models (LLMs) increasingly provide direct answers to user questions, raising concerns about reduced engagement in critical thinking and problem-solving. Hint generation offers an alternative by guiding users toward answers without revealing them, while hint evaluation assesses the quality of such guidance. Research in this area is hindered by fragmented datasets, inconsistent annotation formats, and evaluation tools that are often dataset-specific or unavailable. To address these challenges, we introduce HintEval, an open-source Python library for unified hint generation and evaluation. HintEval standardizes access to diverse hint datasets, supports answer-aware and answer-agnostic generation methods, and implements multiple evaluation metrics within a shared data model. The toolkit enables reproducible experimentation, cross-dataset analysis, and multi-dimensional evaluation with minimal engineering effort. We further demonstrate its utility through human studies in which participants assess generated hints and use them to answer questions, showing that hints can effectively support users in reaching correct answers. HintEval is accompanied by comprehensive documentation, an executable Google Colab notebook for rapid experimentation, and a demonstration video. By promoting consistent evaluation practices and lowering barriers to entry, it facilitates systematic research on hint-based question answering (QA) in NLP and IR.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Jamshid Mozafari, Bhawna Piryani, Abdelrahman Abdallah, Adam Jatowt. 2026-08-29. HintEval: An Open-Source Python Toolkit for Hint Generation and Hint Evaluation. https://arxiv.org/abs/2502.00857

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

Discover connections

Connections use source metadata and explicit phrase matches, not verified experimental comparisons.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

SABER-Math: Automated Benchmark for Information Retrieval Evaluation in Mathematics

As agentic AI systems tackle more complex mathematical tasks, they increasingly rely on information retrieval (IR) to search problem databases, theorem libraries, and educational resources. However, choosing the right retriever remains difficult, as it is infeasible to directly isolate its effect on downstream performance. On the other hand, existing retrieval-specific benchmarks often fail to capture fine-grained mathematical relevance, penalizing relevant documents. We address this gap by introducing SABER-Math, the first fully automated benchmark for evaluating mathematical IR without expert annotation. Starting from 283K high-school-level math problems with solutions, SABER-Math builds challenging reranking tasks in three steps: (i) first, LLMs extract concise solution summaries and mathematical topics for each problem; (ii) then, per-query relevant documents are discovered using ontology topic-based and lexical solutions-summary-based similarities, and (iii) finally, a Swiss-style LLM preference tournament produces fine-grained relevance ratings for the documents. We evaluate lexical retrievers, specialized mathematical retrieval systems, and recent embedding models. We find that while modern embedding models substantially outperform classical and math-specific baselines, even the strongest systems struggle in symbol-heavy domains like Algebra and Calculus. Importantly, we show that general-purpose IR benchmarks such as MTEB do not reliably predict mathematical performance, especially for recent embedding models, highlighting the need for math-specific retrieval benchmarks.

cs.IR

Beyond Polarization: The Generative Constraint of Chain-of-Thought in Pointwise Reranking

In pointwise document reranking, Chain-of-Thought models typically underperform direct scoring models. While existing diagnostics attribute this to inferior classification, score polarization, or calibration breakdown, whether targeted training can bridge this gap remains unclear. Our empirical study first confirms that this gap is stable across scales up to 32B parameters, ruling out model and data capacity confounders. We then apply stress tests utilizing reinforcement learning, fine-grained supervision, and architectural decoupling to explicitly repair these deviations. Although these interventions improve classification accuracy and absolute scores, the relative ranking gap persists. These findings suggest that, within the pointwise scoring paradigm, routing continuous relevance semantics through discrete text constrains ranking signal resolution, revealing a bottleneck that is stable and difficult to overcome under current standard methods, rather than an easily resolvable training bias.

cs.CL

Loci Similes: A Benchmark for Extracting Intertextualities in Latin Literature

Tracing connections between historical texts is an important part of intertextual research, enabling scholars to reconstruct the virtual library of a writer and identify the sources influencing their creative process. These intertextual links manifest in diverse forms, ranging from direct verbatim quotations to subtle allusions and paraphrases disguised by morphological variation. Language models offer a promising path forward due to their capability of capturing semantic similarity beyond lexical overlap. However, the development of new methods for this task is held back by the scarcity of standardized benchmarks and easy-to-use datasets. We address this gap by introducing Loci Similes, a benchmark for Latin intertextuality detection comprising a curated dataset of ~176k text segments and 1,490 expert-verified parallels, including 945 labeled references from an existing dataset. Using this data, we establish baselines for retrieval and classification of intertextualities with both lexical methods and pretrained encoder language models.

cs.IR