arXiv (All)
open access
Atomic and Holistic LLM Judges for Reference-Grounded Support Labels: A Prompt-Controlled Comparison
When an LLM judge only has to assign a three-way support label to a candidate answer given a reference, does asking it to decompose the answer into atomic claims help, and at what cost? We compare four single-call designs that share the judge model, the inputs, and the level of instruction detail: c
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
- Multi-Legal-Bench: When the Answer Is in the Input. Label Leakage in Legal Benchmarks Built from Court Registries#1116307
- Judicial Review of Agency Benefit-Cost Analysis#345808
- The Avoidance of Stereotypical Reasoning in Rendering Judgment#1115428
- The Debate over the Selection and Retention of Judges: How Judges Can Ride the Wave#1115426
- 15 U.S.C. § 6307f — Required disclosures for judges and referees#565746
Record · ID 1143722
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