arXiv (All)
open access
CLM-as-a-Judge: Evaluating an Open Contrastive Decision Model on Public Judge Benchmarks
An open contrastive decision model is near chance as a judge on the hard public benchmarks: Contrastive-LM/CLM-v0.1-8B scores between 0.351 (best- of-four, chance 0.250) and 0.593 (pairwise, chance 0.500), is statistically indistinguishable from coin flipping on RM-Bench and JudgeBench, and answers
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
- Mediocrity is the key for LLM as a Judge Anchor Selection#924523
- Mediocrity is the key for LLM as a Judge Anchor Selection#920292
- The Geometry of LLM-as-Judge: Why Inter-LLM Consensus Is Not Human Alignment#924584
- The Geometry of LLM-as-Judge: Why Inter-LLM Consensus Is Not Human Alignment#920352
- Categorizing judgments as likely to be selected by intuition or deliberation#87741
Record · ID 1216552
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