Related papers: Self-Preference Bias in Rubric-Based Evaluation of…

Large Language Models are versatile general-task solvers, and their capabilities can truly assist people with scholarly peer review as \textit{pre-review} agents, if not as fully autonomous \textit{peer-review} agents. While incredibly…

The deployment of Large Language Models (LLMs) in high-stakes clinical settings demands rigorous and reliable evaluation. However, existing medical benchmarks remain static, suffering from two critical limitations: (1) data contamination,…

Reward modeling lies at the core of reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF), yet most existing reward models rely on scalar or pairwise judgments that fail to capture the multifaceted nature of human preferences. Recent studies…

Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly embedded in evaluative processes, from information filtering to assessing and addressing knowledge gaps through explanation and credibility judgments. This raises the need to examine how such…

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…

Large Language Models (LLMs) have emerged as powerful candidates to inform clinical decision-making processes. While these models play an increasingly prominent role in shaping the digital landscape, two growing concerns emerge in…

Aligning multimodal generative models with human preferences demands reward signals that respect the compositional, multi-dimensional structure of human judgment. Prevailing RLHF approaches reduce this structure to scalar or pairwise…

With the rise in capabilities of large language models (LLMs) and their deployment in real-world tasks, evaluating LLM alignment with human preferences has become an important challenge. Current benchmarks average preferences across all…

Large language model (LLM)-powered assistants have recently integrated memory mechanisms that record user preferences, leading to more personalized and user-aligned responses. However, irrelevant personalized memories are often introduced…

Large language models (LLMs) frequently achieve impressive scores on standardized benchmarks, yet accuracy alone offers a limited view of their capabilities. Evaluating open-source LLMs through leaderboards faces persistent issues like data…

In this study, we investigate the capabilities and inherent biases of advanced large language models (LLMs) such as GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 in the context of debate evaluation. We discover that LLM's performance exceeds humans and surpasses the…

Subjective Answer Grading (SAG) plays a crucial role in education, standardized testing, and automated assessment systems, particularly for evaluating short-form responses in Short Answer Scoring (SAS). However, existing approaches often…

The zero-shot capability of Large Language Models (LLMs) has enabled highly flexible, reference-free metrics for various tasks, making LLM evaluators common tools in NLP. However, the robustness of these LLM evaluators remains relatively…

Benchmarks are the de facto standard for tracking progress in large language models (LLMs), yet static test sets can rapidly saturate, become vulnerable to contamination, and are costly to refresh. Scalable evaluation of open-ended items…

Human relevance assessment is time-consuming and cognitively intensive, limiting the scalability of Information Retrieval evaluation. This has led to growing interest in using large language models (LLMs) as proxies for human judges.…

Large Language Models (LLMs) can be tasked with scoring texts according to pre-defined criteria and on a defined scale, but there is no recognised optimal prompting strategy for this. This article focuses on the task of LLMs scoring journal…

As large language models (LLMs) increasingly generate and process clinical text, scalable evaluation has become critical. LLM-as-a-Judge (LaaJ), which uses LLMs to evaluate model outputs, offers a scalable alternative to costly expert…

Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly employed as automated evaluators to assess the safety of generated content, yet their reliability in this role remains uncertain. This study evaluates a diverse set of 11 LLM judge models across…

Existing approaches for aligning large language models with human preferences face a trade-off that requires a separate reward model (RM) for on-policy learning. In this paper, we present a novel alignment framework, SELF-JUDGE that (1)…

The potential of using Large Language Models (LLMs) themselves to evaluate LLM outputs offers a promising method for assessing model performance across various contexts. Previous research indicates that LLM-as-a-judge exhibits a strong…