Related papers: AdvJudge-Zero: Binary Decision Flips in LLM-as-a-J…

Existing LLM-as-a-Judge systems suffer from three fundamental limitations: limited adaptivity to task- and domain-specific evaluation criteria, systematic biases driven by non-semantic cues such as position, length, format, and model…

Reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) enhances the reasoning of large language models (LLMs), but standard RLVR often depends on human-annotated answers or carefully curated reward specifications. In machine-checkable…

Automated \enquote{LLM-as-a-Judge} frameworks have become the de facto standard for scalable evaluation across natural language processing. For instance, in safety evaluation, these judges are relied upon to evaluate harmfulness in order to…

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…

Reward models (RMs) play a central role throughout the language model (LM) pipeline, particularly in non-verifiable domains. However, the dominant LLM-as-a-Judge paradigm relies on the strong reasoning capabilities of large models, while…

Large Language Models (LLMs) are widely used as proxies for human labelers in both training (Reinforcement Learning from AI Feedback) and large-scale response evaluation (LLM-as-a-judge). Alignment and evaluation are critical components in…

We introduce AutoJudge, a method that accelerates large language model (LLM) inference with task-specific lossy speculative decoding. Instead of matching the original model output distribution token-by-token, we identify which of the…

This paper proposes a novel backdoor threat attacking the LLM-as-a-Judge evaluation regime, where the adversary controls both the candidate and evaluator model. The backdoored evaluator victimizes benign users by unfairly assigning inflated…

Pairwise LLM-as-a-judge evaluation asks the judge to identify the \emph{better} of two candidate answers. We study a one-line modification that asks for the \emph{worse} answer instead and recovers the preference by elimination, a procedure…

LLM as judge systems used to assess text quality code correctness and argument strength are vulnerable to prompt injection attacks. We introduce a framework that separates content author attacks from system prompt attacks and evaluate five…

Most adversarial evaluations of large language model (LLM) safety assess single prompts and report binary pass/fail outcomes, which fails to capture how safety properties evolve under sustained adversarial interaction. We present ADVERSA,…

Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated exceptional capabilities across diverse tasks, driving the development and widespread adoption of LLM-as-a-Judge systems for automated evaluation, including red teaming and benchmarking.…

The performance of large language models (LLMs) is closely linked to their underlying size, leading to ever-growing networks and hence slower inference. Speculative decoding has been proposed as a technique to accelerate autoregressive…

As AI models progress beyond simple chatbots into more complex workflows, we draw ever closer to the event horizon beyond which AI systems will be utilized in autonomous, self-maintaining feedback loops. Any autonomous AI system will depend…

As large language models (LLMs) are increasingly considered for automated assessment and feedback, understanding when LLM marking can be trusted is essential. We evaluate LLM-as-a-judge marking across three physics assessment formats -…

Recently, there has been a trend of evaluating the Large Language Model (LLM) quality in the flavor of LLM-as-a-Judge, namely leveraging another LLM to evaluate the current output quality. However, existing judges are proven to be biased,…

The adoption of Large Language Models (LLMs) as automated evaluators (LLM-as-a-judge) has revealed critical inconsistencies in current evaluation frameworks. We identify two fundamental types of inconsistencies: (1) Score-Comparison…

Reinforcement Learning (RL) has been shown to substantially improve the reasoning capability of small and large language models (LLMs), but existing approaches typically rely on verifiable rewards, hence ground truth labels. We propose an…

Reward-model training is the cost bottleneck in modern Reinforcement Learning Human Feedback (RLHF) pipelines, often requiring tens of billions of parameters and an offline preference-tuning phase. In the proposed method, a frozen,…

LLM-as-judge evaluation has become standard practice for open-ended model assessment; however, judges exhibit systematic biases that cannot be averaged out by increasing the number of scenarios or generations. These biases are often similar…