Related papers: Diagnosing LLM Judge Reliability: Conformal Predic…

LLM-based judges have emerged as a scalable alternative to human evaluation and are increasingly used to assess, compare, and improve models. However, the reliability of LLM-based judges themselves is rarely scrutinized. As LLMs become more…

Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly used for medical entity extraction, yet their confidence scores are often miscalibrated, limiting safe deployment in clinical settings. We present a conformal prediction framework that provides…

Large language model (LLM) judges have often been used alongside traditional, algorithm-based metrics for tasks like summarization because they better capture semantic information, are better at reasoning, and are more robust to…

Computerized Adaptive Testing (CAT) has proven effective for efficient LLM evaluation on multiple-choice benchmarks, but modern LLM evaluation increasingly relies on generation tasks where outputs are scored continuously rather than marked…

Existing LLM-as-a-Judge approaches for evaluating text generation suffer from rating inconsistencies, with low agreement and high rating variance across different evaluator models. We attribute this to subjective evaluation criteria…

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly applied as automatic evaluators for natural language generation assessment often using pairwise comparative judgements. Existing approaches typically rely on single judges or aggregate multiple…

Charts are ubiquitous as they help people understand and reason with data. Recently, various downstream tasks, such as chart question answering, chart2text, and fact-checking, have emerged. Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs) show promise…

Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly used in high-stakes fields where their decisions impact rights and equity. However, LLMs' judicial fairness and implications for social justice remain underexplored. When LLMs act as judges, the…

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…

Logic provides a controlled testbed for evaluating LLM-based reasoners, yet standard SAT-style benchmarks often conflate surface difficulty (length, wording, clause order) with the structural phenomena that actually determine…

Large language models are increasingly used as judges (LLM-as-a-judge) to evaluate model outputs at scale, but their assessments often diverge systematically from human judgments. We present Bridge, a unified statistical framework that…

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…

The $\textit{LLM-as-a-judge}$ paradigm has become the operational backbone of automated AI evaluation pipelines, yet rests on an unverified assumption: that judges evaluate text strictly on its semantic content, impervious to surrounding…

Assessing software test coverage at scale remains a bottleneck in QA pipelines. We present LLM-as-a-Judge (LAJ), a production-ready, rubric-driven framework for evaluating Gherkin acceptance tests with structured JSON outputs. Across 20…

As Large Language Models (LLMs) become integrated into high-stakes domains, there is a growing need for evaluation methods that are both scalable for real-time deployment and reliable for critical decision-making. While human evaluation is…

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.…

LLM-as-a-Judge has become the dominant paradigm for evaluating language model outputs, yet LLM judges exhibit systematic biases that compromise evaluation reliability. We present a comprehensive empirical study comparing nine debiasing…

As reasoning LLMs increasingly trade tokens for accuracy through deliberation, search, and self-correction, a single accuracy score can no longer tell whether those tokens buy useful reasoning, recovery from hard instances, or unnecessary…

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…

LLMs are increasingly employed both as judges for evaluating open-ended outputs and as co-creation partners in AI-assisted programming; yet rigorous evaluation in human-AI co-creation settings remains underdeveloped as judgments must be…