arXiv (All)
open access
Pair Difficulty Matters: Rethinking Pairwise LLM-as-a-Judge Evaluation and Consistency
Large Language Model judges are widely used to rank texts and text-generating systems through pairwise comparison, and their reliability is typically assessed via three proxies: position bias, transitivity, and pairwise agreement (self- or human-labeled). Because these proxies drive judge selection
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
- Am I More Pointwise or Pairwise? Revealing Position Bias in Rubric-Based LLM-as-a-Judge#987580
- Classifying Interpretive Canons at the Sentence Level: A Benchmark from the German Federal Constitutional Court#1063156
- Epistemic Warrant for LLM Recommendations: Characterizing the Basis for Reliance When Ground Truth Is Unavailable#926995
- Benchmark Scores Are Pipeline-Dependent: A Reliability Audit of Cybersecurity LLM Benchmarks#986403
- Binarization Flattens the Score Space#1130639
Record · ID 1141894
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