REVIEW 6 cited by
Human-Centered Design Recommendations for LLM-as-a-Judge
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
Traditional reference-based metrics, such as BLEU and ROUGE, are less effective for assessing outputs from Large Language Models (LLMs) that produce highly creative or superior-quality text, or in situations where reference outputs are unavailable. While human evaluation remains an option, it is costly and difficult to scale. Recent work using LLMs as evaluators (LLM-as-a-judge) is promising, but trust and reliability remain a significant concern. Integrating human input is crucial to ensure criteria used to evaluate are aligned with the human's intent, and evaluations are robust and consistent. This paper presents a user study of a design exploration called EvaluLLM, that enables users to leverage LLMs as customizable judges, promoting human involvement to balance trust and cost-saving potential with caution. Through interviews with eight domain experts, we identified the need for assistance in developing effective evaluation criteria aligning the LLM-as-a-judge with practitioners' preferences and expectations. We offer findings and design recommendations to optimize human-assisted LLM-as-judge systems.
Forward citations
Cited by 6 Pith papers
-
Results-Actionability Gap: Understanding How Practitioners Evaluate LLM Products in the Wild
Qualitative study of 19 practitioners reveals ten LLM product evaluation practices and introduces the results-actionability gap as a key barrier to turning findings into improvements.
-
Guidelines for Empirical Studies in Software Engineering involving Large Language Models
The paper delivers a taxonomy of seven LLM study types in software engineering along with eight guidelines that separate mandatory requirements from recommended practices to address reproducibility challenges.
-
DB-3DME: From Dataset to Benchmark for Human-aligned Automatic 3D Mesh Evaluation
DB-3DME supplies a human-rated 3D mesh dataset and shows that fine-tuning the visual encoder of Qwen-2.5-VL-7B produces automatic evaluations that align better with humans than prior VLMs.
-
Guidelines for Empirical Studies in Software Engineering involving Large Language Models
A group of 22 researchers proposes seven study types and eight guidelines for empirical software engineering studies involving LLMs to enhance reproducibility and replicability.
-
LLM-as-Judge for Semantic Judging of Powerline Segmentation in UAV Inspection
An LLM produces consistent categorical judgments and appropriate confidence declines when evaluating powerline segmentation quality under controlled visual degradations, suggesting it can serve as a reliable watchdog.
-
LLMs-as-Judges: A Comprehensive Survey on LLM-based Evaluation Methods
A survey that organizes LLMs-as-judges research into functionality, methodology, applications, meta-evaluation, and limitations.
Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.