相关论文: No-Knowledge Alarms for Misaligned LLMs-as-Judges

To reduce the need for human annotations, large language models (LLMs) have been proposed as judges of the quality of other candidate models. The performance of LLM judges is typically evaluated by measuring the correlation with human…

Large language models (LLMs) are widely used as scalable evaluators of model responses in lieu of human annotators. However, imperfect sensitivity and specificity of the LLM judges induce bias in naive evaluation scores. We propose a simple…

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…

We present the Judge Reliability Harness, an open source library for constructing validation suites that test the reliability of LLM judges. As LLM based scoring is widely deployed in AI benchmarks, more tooling is needed to efficiently…

LLM-judged benchmarks are increasingly used to evaluate complex model behaviors, yet their design introduces failure modes absent in conventional ground-truth based benchmarks. We argue that without tight objectives and verifiable…

LLM-as-judge systems promise scalable, consistent evaluation. We find the opposite: judges are consistent, but not with each other; they are consistent with themselves. Across 3,240 evaluations (9 judges x 120 unique video x pack items x 3…

As Natural Language Generation (NLG) continues to be widely adopted, properly assessing it has become quite difficult. Lately, using large language models (LLMs) for evaluating these generations has gained traction, as they tend to align…

LLM-as-a-Judge has emerged as a promising alternative to human evaluators across various tasks, yet inherent biases - particularly position bias, the tendency to favor solutions based on their position within the prompt - compromise its…

Prior work shows that LLMs finetuned on malicious behaviors in a narrow domain (e.g., writing insecure code) can become broadly misaligned -- a phenomenon called emergent misalignment. We investigate whether this extends from conventional…

Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly used to evaluate information retrieval (IR) systems, generating relevance judgments traditionally made by human assessors. Recent empirical studies suggest that LLM-based evaluations often align…

Large Language Models (LLMs) have become essential for offensive language detection, yet their ability to handle annotation disagreement remains underexplored. Disagreement samples, which arise from subjective interpretations, pose a unique…

LLM-as-a-Judge has emerged as a popular evaluation strategy, where advanced large language models assess generation results in alignment with human instructions. While these models serve as a promising alternative to human annotators, their…

Large Language Models are increasingly used as judges to evaluate code artifacts when exhaustive human review or executable test coverage is unavailable. LLM-judge is increasingly relevant in agentic software engineering workflows, where it…

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) are increasingly integral to information retrieval (IR), powering ranking, evaluation, and AI-assisted content creation. This widespread adoption necessitates a critical examination of potential biases arising…

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…

In the absence of abundant reliable annotations for challenging tasks and contexts, how can we expand the frontier of LLM capabilities with potentially wrong answers? We focus on two research questions: (1) Can LLMs generate reliable…

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used as automated judges to evaluate recommendation systems, search engines, and other subjective tasks, where relying on human evaluators can be costly, time-consuming, and unscalable. LLMs…

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…

Multi-round incomplete information tasks are crucial for evaluating the lateral thinking capabilities of large language models (LLMs). Currently, research primarily relies on multiple benchmarks and automated evaluation metrics to assess…