Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 cited by

MCTS-Judge: Test-Time Scaling in LLM-as-a-Judge for Code Correctness Evaluation

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

arxiv 2502.12468 v2 pith:2J6365YO submitted 2025-02-18 cs.LG cs.AI

MCTS-Judge: Test-Time Scaling in LLM-as-a-Judge for Code Correctness Evaluation

classification cs.LG cs.AI
keywords mcts-judgellm-as-a-judgescalingtest-timetrajectorycodecorrectnesscurrent
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

The LLM-as-a-Judge paradigm shows promise for evaluating generative content but lacks reliability in reasoning-intensive scenarios, such as programming. Inspired by recent advances in reasoning models and shifts in scaling laws, we pioneer bringing test-time computation into LLM-as-a-Judge, proposing MCTS-Judge, a resource-efficient, System-2 thinking framework for code correctness evaluation. MCTS-Judge leverages Monte Carlo Tree Search (MCTS) to decompose problems into simpler, multi-perspective evaluations. Through a node-selection strategy that combines self-assessment based on historical actions in the current trajectory and the Upper Confidence Bound for Trees based on prior rollouts, MCTS-Judge balances global optimization and refinement of the current trajectory. We further designed a high-precision, unit-test-level reward mechanism to encourage the Large Language Model (LLM) to perform line-by-line analysis. Extensive experiments on three benchmarks and five LLMs demonstrate the effectiveness of MCTS-Judge, which improves the base model's accuracy from 41% to 80%, surpassing the o1-series models with 3x fewer tokens. Further evaluations validate the superiority of its reasoning trajectory in logic, analytics, thoroughness, and overall quality, while revealing the test-time scaling law of the LLM-as-a-Judge paradigm.

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

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

  1. RankJudge: A Multi-Turn LLM-as-a-Judge Synthetic Benchmark Generator

    cs.CL 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    RankJudge creates paired multi-turn conversations with isolated single-turn flaws to generate unambiguous benchmarks for LLM-as-a-judge systems across ML, biomedicine, and finance domains.

  2. Geometry-Aware MCTS for Extremal Problems in Combinatorial Geometry

    cs.AI 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Geometry-aware MCTS with incremental constraint updates and symmetry pruning yields new best-known configurations for five of six tested combinatorial geometry problems, including ~1.8n points for Max-N3IL on grids 82-119.

  3. 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.