Can You Trust LLM Judgments? Reliability of LLM-as-a-Judge
Large Language Models (LLMs) have become increasingly powerful and ubiquitous, but their stochastic nature poses challenges to the reliability of their outputs. While deterministic settings can improve consistency, they do not guarantee reliability, as a single sample from the model's probability distribution can still be misleading. Building upon the concept of LLM-as-a-judge, we introduce a novel framework for rigorously evaluating the reliability of LLM judgments, leveraging McDonald's omega. We evaluate the reliability of LLMs when judging the outputs of other LLMs on standard single-turn and multi-turn benchmarks, simultaneously investigating the impact of temperature on reliability. By analyzing these results, we demonstrate the limitations of fixed randomness and the importance of considering multiple samples, which we show has significant implications for downstream applications. Our findings highlight the need for a nuanced understanding of LLM reliability and the potential risks associated with over-reliance on single-shot evaluations. This work provides a crucial step towards building more trustworthy and reliable LLM-based systems and applications.
Code (1)
Similar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
When Trust Meets Truth: Trust-Truth Separability in LLM-as-Judge
LLM-as-Judge systems can produce multi-dimensional evaluations, such as trustworthiness, reliability, and factuality, and these outputs are often interpreted as independent evidence. We test this assumption for a common …
Label Effects: Shared Heuristic Reliance in Trust Assessment by Humans and LLM-as-a-Judge
Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used as automated evaluators (LLM-as-a-Judge). This work challenges its reliability by showing that trust judgments by LLMs are biased by disclosed source labels. Using a cou…
Overconfidence in LLM-as-a-Judge: Diagnosis and Confidence-Driven Solution
Large Language Models (LLMs) are widely used as automated judges, where practical value depends on both accuracy and trustworthy, risk-aware judgments. Existing approaches predominantly focus on accuracy, overlooking the…
Who can we trust? LLM-as-a-jury for Comparative Assessment
Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly applied as automatic evaluators for natural language generation assessment often using pairwise comparative judgements. Existing approaches typically rely on single judges or…
Diagnosing the Reliability of LLM-as-a-Judge via Item Response Theory
While LLM-as-a-Judge is widely used in automated evaluation, existing validation practices primarily operate at the level of observed outputs, offering limited insight into whether LLM judges themselves function as stabl…