arXiv (All)
open access
Human-Anchored Inference for Ranking New Models with Large Language Model Judges
Human pairwise comparisons provide a reference for evaluating large language models (LLMs), but collecting sufficient judgments for each new release is costly and time-consuming. LLM judges offer a scalable alternative, although their comparisons may differ systematically from human preferences and
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- What is the Role of Small Models in the LLM Era: A Survey#1049587
- Can Large Language Models be a Cardinality Estimator? An Empirical study#2796
- Optimal Model Activation Policies for Inference Networks of Large Language Models#1110390
- InComeS: Integrating Compression and Selection Mechanisms into LLMs for Efficient Model Editing#820206
- Compound-QA: A Benchmark for Evaluating LLMs on Compound Questions#1037686
Record · ID 1014189
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive