Can Large Language Models Outperform Non-Experts in Poetry Evaluation? A Comparative Study Using the Consensual Assessment Technique

The Consensual Assessment Technique (CAT) evaluates creativity through holistic expert judgments. We investigate the use of two advanced Large Language Models (LLMs), Claude-3-Opus and GPT-4o, to evaluate poetry by a methodology inspired by the CAT. Using a dataset of 90 poems, we found that these LLMs can surpass the results achieved by non-expert human judges at matching a ground truth based on publication venue, particularly when assessing smaller subsets of poems. Claude-3-Opus exhibited slightly superior performance than GPT-4o. We show that LLMs are viable tools for accurately assessing poetry, paving the way for their broader application into other creative domains.