Related papers: Mitigating the Bias of Large Language Model Evalua…

Automatic evaluation using multimodal large language models (MLLMs), commonly referred to as MLLM-as-a-Judge, has been widely used to measure model performance. If such MLLM-as-a-Judge methods were biased, they could distort model…

Despite growing interest in using Large Language Models (LLMs) for educational assessment, it remains unclear how closely they align with human scoring. We present a systematic evaluation of instruction-tuned LLMs across three open…

Large language models (LLMs) can generate persuasive narratives at scale, raising concerns about their potential use in disinformation campaigns. Assessing this risk ultimately requires understanding how readers receive such content. In…

The ability to rigorously estimate the failure rates of large language models (LLMs) is a prerequisite for their safe deployment. Currently, however, practitioners often face a tradeoff between expensive human gold standards and potentially…

Using language models to scalably approximate human preferences on text quality (LLM-as-a-judge) has become a standard practice applicable to many tasks. A judgment is often extracted from the judge's textual output alone, typically with…

As Large Language Models (LLMs) continue to evolve, evaluating them remains a persistent challenge. Many recent evaluations use LLMs as judges to score outputs from other LLMs, often relying on a single large model like GPT-4o. However,…

The emergence of Large Language Models (LLMs) as chat assistants capable of generating human-like conversations has amplified the need for robust evaluation methods, particularly for open-ended tasks. Conventional metrics such as EM and F1,…

Large Language Model (LLM) based judges form the underpinnings of key safety evaluation processes such as offline benchmarking, automated red-teaming, and online guardrailing. This widespread requirement raises the crucial question: can we…

Large Language Models(LLMs) have revolutionized various applications in natural language processing (NLP) by providing unprecedented text generation, translation, and comprehension capabilities. However, their widespread deployment has…

Large Language Models (LLMs) offer the potential to automate hiring by matching job descriptions with candidate resumes, streamlining recruitment processes, and reducing operational costs. However, biases inherent in these models may lead…

The LLM-as-a-judge paradigm is widely used in both evaluating free-text model responses and reward modeling for model alignment and fine-tuning. Recently, fine-tuning judges with judge-specific data has emerged as an often preferred choice…

LLM-as-a-Judge refers to the automatic modeling of preferences for responses generated by Large Language Models (LLMs), which is of significant importance for both LLM evaluation and reward modeling. Although generative LLMs have made…

Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly used as scalable evaluators of model outputs, but their preference judgments exhibit systematic biases and can diverge from human evaluations. Prior work on LLM-as-a-judge has largely focused on…

LLM-as-a-judge has become a promising paradigm for using large language models (LLMs) to evaluate natural language generation (NLG), but the uncertainty of its evaluation remains underexplored. This lack of reliability may limit its…

Large Language Models (LLMs) have become increasingly powerful and ubiquitous, but their stochastic nature poses challenges to the reliability of their outputs. While deterministic settings can improve consistency, they do not guarantee…

Existing studies on bias mitigation methods for large language models (LLMs) use diverse baselines and metrics to evaluate debiasing performance, leading to inconsistent comparisons among them. Moreover, their evaluations are mostly based…

Recent studies show that large language models (LLMs) exhibit self-preference bias when serving as judges, meaning they tend to favor their own responses over those generated by other models. Existing methods typically measure this bias by…

Automated evaluation leveraging large language models (LLMs), commonly referred to as LLM evaluators or LLM-as-a-judge, has been widely used in measuring the performance of dialogue systems. However, the self-preference bias in LLMs has…

Large Language Model (LLM)-based judgments leverage powerful LLMs to efficiently evaluate candidate content and provide judgment scores. However, the inherent biases and vulnerabilities of LLM-generated judgments raise concerns,…

We present the first systematic evaluation examining format bias in performance of large language models (LLMs). Our approach distinguishes between two categories of an evaluation metric under format constraints to reliably and accurately…