pith. sign in

arxiv: 2310.05470 · v2 · pith:GNCCMZXRnew · submitted 2023-10-09 · 💻 cs.CL · cs.AI

Generative Judge for Evaluating Alignment

classification 💻 cs.CL cs.AI
keywords modelsauto-jlanguagescenariostasksaddressdifferentdiverse
0
0 comments X
read the original abstract

The rapid development of Large Language Models (LLMs) has substantially expanded the range of tasks they can address. In the field of Natural Language Processing (NLP), researchers have shifted their focus from conventional NLP tasks (e.g., sequence tagging and parsing) towards tasks that revolve around aligning with human needs (e.g., brainstorming and email writing). This shift in task distribution imposes new requirements on evaluating these aligned models regarding generality (i.e., assessing performance across diverse scenarios), flexibility (i.e., examining under different protocols), and interpretability (i.e., scrutinizing models with explanations). In this paper, we propose a generative judge with 13B parameters, Auto-J, designed to address these challenges. Our model is trained on user queries and LLM-generated responses under massive real-world scenarios and accommodates diverse evaluation protocols (e.g., pairwise response comparison and single-response evaluation) with well-structured natural language critiques. To demonstrate the efficacy of our approach, we construct a new testbed covering 58 different scenarios. Experimentally, Auto-J outperforms a series of strong competitors, including both open-source and closed-source models, by a large margin. We also provide detailed analysis and case studies to further reveal the potential of our method and make a variety of resources public at https://github.com/GAIR-NLP/auto-j.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 12 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Beyond Verifiable Rewards: Rubric-Based GRM for Reinforced Fine-Tuning SWE Agents

    cs.LG 2026-03 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    A rubric-based generative reward model improves reinforced fine-tuning of SWE agents by supplying richer behavioral guidance than binary terminal rewards alone.

  2. Agreement Metrics for LLM-as-Judge Evaluation: What to Report and Why

    cs.CL 2026-05 conditional novelty 6.0

    For binary LLM judge validation, Pearson's r, Spearman's ρ, Kendall's τ_b, phi, and Matthews correlation all equal a single number on non-degenerate data, Cohen's κ supplies the extra signal on label-rate drift, and a...

  3. LIMO: Less is More for Reasoning

    cs.CL 2025-02 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    LIMO achieves 63.3% on AIME24 and 95.6% on MATH500 via supervised fine-tuning on roughly 1% of the data used by prior models, supporting the claim that minimal strategic examples suffice when pre-training has already ...

  4. Improving Video Generation with Human Feedback

    cs.CV 2025-01 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    A human preference dataset and VideoReward model enable Flow-DPO and Flow-NRG to produce smoother, better-aligned videos from text prompts in flow-based generators.

  5. Trust Region On-Policy Distillation

    cs.LG 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    TrOPD stabilizes on-policy distillation for LLMs with trust-region learning, outlier estimation, and off-policy guidance, outperforming prior OPD methods on reasoning and code benchmarks.

  6. LLM-as-a-Judge for Human-AI Co-Creation: A Reliability-Aware Evaluation Framework for Coding

    cs.SE 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    LLM judges for human-AI coding co-creation show moderate performance (ROC-AUC 0.59) and low agreement, with co-creation success concentrating early in interactions.

  7. Judging the Judges: A Systematic Evaluation of Bias Mitigation Strategies in LLM-as-a-Judge Pipelines

    cs.AI 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    Style bias dominates LLM-as-a-Judge systems far more than position bias, with debiasing strategies providing model-dependent gains and public tools released for replication.

  8. Judging the Judges: A Systematic Evaluation of Bias Mitigation Strategies in LLM-as-a-Judge Pipelines

    cs.AI 2026-04 conditional novelty 5.0

    Gemini 2.5 Flash with a Combined Budget debiasing strategy achieves 71.0% judge agreement at ~$0.001/evaluation, outperforming frontier models at 15x lower cost.

  9. Sensorimotor Self-Recognition in Multimodal Large Language Model-Driven Robots

    cs.AI 2025-05 unverdicted novelty 4.0

    Multimodal LLMs in robots develop self-identification and predictive awareness through sensorimotor loops, with structural equation modeling linking sensory integration to dimensions of the minimal self.

  10. A Survey on LLM-as-a-Judge

    cs.CL 2024-11 unverdicted novelty 4.0

    A survey on LLM-as-a-Judge that reviews reliability strategies, proposes evaluation methods, and introduces a novel benchmark for assessing such systems.

  11. A Survey of Reinforcement Learning for Large Reasoning Models

    cs.CL 2025-09 accept novelty 3.0

    A survey compiling RL methods, challenges, data resources, and applications for enhancing reasoning in large language models and large reasoning models since DeepSeek-R1.

  12. LLMs-as-Judges: A Comprehensive Survey on LLM-based Evaluation Methods

    cs.CL 2024-12 accept novelty 3.0

    A survey that organizes LLMs-as-judges research into functionality, methodology, applications, meta-evaluation, and limitations.