arXiv (All)
open access
When the Judge Should Not Decide: Evidence-Locked, Non-Compensatory Selection Bounds LLM-Judge Failure in Reasoning Pipelines
An LLM judge deployed inside a reasoning pipeline does not merely measure quality, it decides which answer ships. We show that the cost of that decision depends less on judge accuracy than on the decision rule the judge is embedded in. On frozen candidate pools from four GRPO policies, an unconstrai
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
- Beyond Correctness: Validity-Oriented Evaluation of Biomedical LLM Judges#793950
- Beyond Correctness: Validity-Oriented Evaluation of Biomedical LLM Judges#789931
- Complexity of Grounded Semantics and Preferred Semantics in Finitary Argumentation Frameworks#1249288
- LLMs as a Jury: Cross-Model Consensus Can Outperform Process Reward Models for LLM Reasoning#615092
- LLMs as a Jury: Cross-Model Consensus Can Outperform Process Reward Models for LLM Reasoning#614125
Record · ID 1388416
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