Title: Excision Score: Evaluating Edits with Surgical Precision
Primary area: other topics in machine learning (i.e., none of the above)
Keywords: Revision Similarity, Excision Score, Code Editing, SARI, BLEU

Abstract: Many tasks revolve around editing a document, whether code or text. 
We formulate the revision similarity problem to unify a wide range of machine learning evaluation problems whose goal is to assess a revision to an existing document.
This definition rests on the observation that revisions usually change only a small portion of an existing document, so the existing document and its immediate revisions share a majority of their content.

We formulate five adequacy criteria for revision similarity measures, designed to align them with human judgement.
We show that popular pairwise measures, like BLEU, fail to meet these criteria, because their scores are dominated by the shared content. 
They report high similarity between two revisions when humans would assess them as quite different. 
This is a fundamental flaw we address.

We propose a novel static measure, Excision Score (ES), which computes longest common subsequence (LCS) to remove content shared by an existing document with the ground truth and predicted revisions, before comparing only the remaining divergent regions.
This is analogous to a surgeon creating a sterile field to focus on the work area. 
We use approximation to speed the standard cubic LCS computation to quadratic.
In code-editing evaluation, where static measures are often used as a cheap proxy for test-execution-based scores, we demonstrate that ES surpasses existing measures. 
When aligned with test execution on HumanEvalFix, ES improves over its nearest competitor, SARI, by 12\% Pearson correlation and by >21\% over standard measures like BLEU.
The key adequacy criterion is invariance to increasing shared context; when we perturb HumanEvalFix with increased shared context, ES' improvement over SARI increases to 20\% and >30\% over standard measures.
ES also handles other corner cases that other measures do not, such as correctly aligning moved code blocks, and appropriately rewarding matching insertions or deletions.

TL;DR: Existing text similarity measures are ill-suited for evaluating edits; we introduce a new measure, Excision Score, which does better.