arXiv (All)
open access
JudgeProfile: Understanding and Steering Subjectivity in LLM Judges
LLM judges are inherently subjective, often favoring different responses in pairwise comparison when neither option is objectively wrong. To study this subjectivity, we introduce JudgeProfile, a framework that dissects LLM evaluation into perception (how a judge compares two responses across specifi
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
- Human-Anchored Factuality Evaluation with Strategic Annotation#819938
- Can We Trust the Judges? Validation of Factuality Evaluation Methods via Answer Perturbation#1109553
- Judging Requires Judgment#167520
- JEV-as-a-Judge: Accept When Confident, Escalate When Unsure#1062439
- JEV-as-a-Judge: Accept When Confident, Escalate When Unsure#1043135
Record · ID 1131906
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