REVIEW 7 cited by
Leveraging LLMs as Meta-Judges: A Multi-Agent Framework for Evaluating LLM Judgments
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
Leveraging LLMs as Meta-Judges: A Multi-Agent Framework for Evaluating LLM Judgments
read the original abstract
Large language models (LLMs) are being widely applied across various fields, but as tasks become more complex, evaluating their responses is increasingly challenging. Compared to human evaluators, the use of LLMs to support performance evaluation offers a more efficient alternative. However, most studies focus mainly on aligning LLMs' judgments with human preferences, overlooking the existence of biases and mistakes in human judgment. Furthermore, how to select suitable LLM judgments given multiple potential LLM responses remains underexplored. To address these two aforementioned issues, we propose a three-stage meta-judge selection pipeline: 1) developing a comprehensive rubric with GPT-4 and human experts, 2) using three advanced LLM agents to score judgments, and 3) applying a threshold to filter out low-scoring judgments. Compared to methods using a single LLM as both judge and meta-judge, our pipeline introduces multi-agent collaboration and a more comprehensive rubric. Experimental results on the JudgeBench dataset show about 15.55\% improvement compared to raw judgments and about 8.37\% improvement over the single-agent baseline. Our work demonstrates the potential of LLMs as meta-judges and lays the foundation for future research on constructing preference datasets for LLM-as-a-judge reinforcement learning.
Forward citations
Cited by 7 Pith papers
-
Counsel: A Meta-Evaluation Dataset for Agentic Tasks
Counsel is a new dataset of LLM-generated process critiques on agent benchmarks paired with human labels on error location and reasoning quality, achieving 0.78 Krippendorff alpha.
-
CoEval: Ranking Language Models for Custom Tasks Without Labeled Data or Trustworthy Benchmarks
CoEval generates task-specific benchmarks by rotating models through teacher, student, and judge roles, then weights questions by discriminative power and judges by panel consensus to recover accurate model rankings w...
-
Using LLM-as-a-Judge/Jury to Advance Scalable, Clinically-Validated Safety Evaluations of Model Responses to Users Demonstrating Psychosis
Seven clinician-informed safety criteria enable LLM-as-a-Judge to reach substantial agreement with human consensus (Cohen's κ up to 0.75) on evaluating LLM responses to users demonstrating psychosis.
-
Multi-Agent Debate Strategies: Survey, Taxonomy, and Challenges
A systematic review of 141 papers derives a three-axis taxonomy of multi-agent debate design (participants, interaction, agreement) and shows the field has converged on a narrow default pattern.
-
ABot-AgentOS: A General Robotic Agent OS with Lifelong Multi-modal Memory
A robotic agent operating system with source-grounded graph memory and split-wise self-evolution improves long-horizon embodied task success and memory QA scores over baseline controllers.
-
Calibrate, Don't Curate: Label-Efficient Estimation from Noisy LLM Judges
Calibrating the full set of LLM judges with labeled data halves calibration error versus top-5 accuracy selection on RewardBench2 and outperforms on four benchmarks.
-
ABot-AgentOS: A General Robotic Agent OS with Lifelong Multi-modal Memory
A hierarchical robotic Agent OS with source-grounded multi-modal graph memory and split-gated self-evolution improves long-horizon embodied execution and memory QA over single-controller and prior memory baselines.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.