Hugging Face Trending Papers
Stopping and Routing LLM Judge Panels
Read the original on Hugging Face Trending Papers →The Flow has not summarised this story yet — read it at Hugging Face Trending Papers.
Related stories
arXiv Computation and Language
5d ago
Stopping and Routing LLM Judge Panels
arXiv:2608. 19802v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: LLM evaluation pipelines often have many candidate judges: general LLM-as-a-judge prompts, reward models, safety classifiers, confidence variants, and task-specific verifiers.
arXiv AI
2d ago
Share the Judge, Learn the Deferral: Where Specialization Helps LLM Evaluation
The paper investigates two strategies for improving large language model (LLM) evaluation: specialized judge weights and rule‑based deferral policies. Experiments on nearly 100,000 rubric‑conditioned samples show that correct rubrics boost accuracy, while incorrect ones hurt it, and that splitting training data into criterion‑specific experts can severely degrade performance unless the experts are warm‑started from a unified model. The authors demonstrate that lightweight deferral cascades can match or exceed the accuracy of larger standalone judges at a fraction of the compute cost, and they provide practical design rules for building efficient, reliable LLM evaluators.
Hugging Face Trending Papers
Jul 30
Share the Judge, Learn the Deferral: Where Specialization Helps LLM Evaluation
Agentic systems have widened the gap between producing candidate outputs and reviewing them. This paper asks a practical architectural question: should domain specialization be built into an evaluator's weights, or into the rule that decides when its judgment can be trusted?
arXiv AI
Jul 9
Operational Reframing and Approval-Framed Delegation in Multi-Agent LLM Safety
arXiv:2607. 07097v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Safety evaluations of multi-agent LLM systems often compare a direct prompt with a planner-executor pipeline and report the difference as a single "pipeline effect.
arXiv AI
Jul 28
Codifying the Judge: Scalable Evaluation via Program Distillation
arXiv:2607. 22561v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: LLM-as-a-judge has become the standard for automated evaluation, but it suffers from high cost, significant latency, and opaque decisions -- limitations that undermine its scalability and reliability.
arXiv AI
Aug 14
Reasoning Jury: Multi-Model Consensus for Evaluating Reasoning Traces
arXiv:2608. 12585v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Improving reasoning LLMs requires the ability to judge the quality of long reasoning traces for effective reasoning data curation, strong training signals during reinforcement learning, and an in-depth understanding of reasoning behaviors during model performance evaluation.