Related papers: Mitigating Self-Preference by Authorship Obfuscati…

Large Language Models are cognitively biased judges. Large Language Models (LLMs) have recently been shown to be effective as automatic evaluators with simple prompting and in-context learning. In this work, we assemble 15 LLMs of four…

Self-preference is a fundamental feature of biological organisms. Since large language models (LLMs) lack sentience, they might be expected to avoid such distortions. Yet, across 72 experiments and ~41,000 queries, we discovered massive…

The "LLM-as-a-Judge" paradigm, using Large Language Models (LLMs) as automated evaluators, is pivotal to LLM development, offering scalable feedback for complex tasks. However, the reliability of these judges is compromised by various…

The advent of Large Language Models (LLMs) has revolutionized product recommenders, yet their susceptibility to adversarial manipulation poses critical challenges, particularly in real-world commercial applications. Our approach is the…

Large language models (LLMs) are playing an increasingly integral, though largely informal, role in scholarly peer review. Yet it remains unclear whether LLMs reproduce the biases observed in human decision-making. We adapt a resume-style…

Large language models (LLMs) are being widely applied across various fields, but as tasks become more complex, evaluating their responses is increasingly challenging. Compared to human evaluators, the use of LLMs to support performance…

New Large Language Models (LLMs) become available every few weeks, and modern application developers confronted with the unenviable task of having to decide if they should switch to a new model. While human evaluation remains the gold…

Large Language Models (LLMs) are often used as automated judges to evaluate text, but their effectiveness can be hindered by various unintentional biases. We propose using linear classifying probes, trained by leveraging differences between…

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…

The use of language models for automatically evaluating long-form text (LLM-as-a-judge) is becoming increasingly common, yet most LLM judges are optimized exclusively for English, with strategies for enhancing their multilingual evaluation…

Auto-evaluating language models (LMs), i.e., using a grader LM to evaluate the candidate LM, is an appealing way to accelerate the evaluation process and the cost associated with it. But this presents a paradox: how can we trust the grader…

Fair decisions require ignoring irrelevant, potentially biasing, information. To achieve this, decision-makers need to approximate what decision they would have made had they not known certain facts, such as the gender or race of a job…

Large language models (LLMs) often generate natural language rationales -- free-form explanations that help improve performance on complex reasoning tasks and enhance interpretability for human users. However, evaluating these rationales…

LLM-as-a-Judge employs large language models (LLMs), such as GPT-4, to evaluate the quality of LLM-generated responses, gaining popularity for its cost-effectiveness and strong alignment with human evaluations. However, training proxy judge…

Recent research has explored LLMs as scalable tools for relevance labeling, but studies indicate they are susceptible to priming effects, where prior relevance judgments influence later ones. Although psychological theories link personality…

Preference mechanisms, such as human preference, LLM-as-a-Judge (LaaJ), and reward models, are central to aligning and evaluating large language models (LLMs). Yet, the underlying concepts that drive these preferences remain poorly…

Recent research shows that pre-trained language models (PLMs) suffer from "prompt bias" in factual knowledge extraction, i.e., prompts tend to introduce biases toward specific labels. Prompt bias presents a significant challenge in…

Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly being used to autonomously evaluate the quality of content in communication systems, e.g., to assess responses in telecom customer support chatbots. However, the impartiality of these AI…

Large Language Models (LLMs) have emerged as promising solutions for a variety of medical and clinical decision support applications. However, LLMs are often subject to different types of biases, which can lead to unfair treatment of…

Adopting human and large language models (LLM) as judges (a.k.a human- and LLM-as-a-judge) for evaluating the performance of LLMs has recently gained attention. Nonetheless, this approach concurrently introduces potential biases from human…