Learning to Plan & Reason for Evaluation with Thinking-LLM-as-a-Judge
LLM-as-a-Judge models generate chain-of-thought (CoT) sequences intended to capture the step-bystep reasoning process that underlies the final evaluation of a response. However, due to the lack of human annotated CoTs for evaluation, the required components and structure of effective reasoning traces remain understudied. Consequently, previous approaches often (1) constrain reasoning traces to hand-designed components, such as a list of criteria, reference answers, or verification questions and (2) structure them such that planning is intertwined with the reasoning for evaluation. In this work, we propose EvalPlanner, a preference optimization algorithm for Thinking-LLM-as-a-Judge that first generates an unconstrained evaluation plan, followed by its execution, and then the final judgment. In a self-training loop, EvalPlanner iteratively optimizes over synthetically constructed evaluation plans and executions, leading to better final verdicts. Our method achieves a new state-of-the-art performance for generative reward models on RewardBench (with a score of 93.9), despite being trained on fewer amount of, and synthetically generated, preference pairs. Additional experiments on other benchmarks like RM-Bench, JudgeBench, and FollowBenchEval further highlight the utility of both planning and reasoning for building robust LLM-as-a-Judge reasoning models.
Code (0)
등록된 구현이 없습니다.
Similar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
Explicit Reasoning Makes Better Judges: A Systematic Study on Accuracy, Efficiency, and Robustness
As Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly adopted as automated judges in benchmarking and reward modeling, ensuring their reliability, efficiency, and robustness has become critical. In this work, we present a sys…
Computational EfficiencyFew-Shot LearningWeak-eval-Strong: Evaluating and Eliciting Lateral Thinking of LLMs with Situation Puzzles
While advancements in NLP have significantly improved the performance of Large Language Models (LLMs) on tasks requiring vertical thinking, their lateral thinking capabilities remain under-explored and challenging to mea…
Question AnsweringSurgGoal: Rethinking Surgical Planning Evaluation via Goal-Satisfiability
Surgical planning integrates visual perception, long-horizon reasoning, and procedural knowledge, yet it remains unclear whether current evaluation protocols reliably assess vision-language models (VLMs) in safety-critic…
Reasoning Model Is Superior LLM-Judge, Yet Suffers from Biases
This paper presents the first systematic comparison investigating whether Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) are superior judges to non-reasoning LLMs. Our empirical analysis yields four key findings: 1) LRMs outperform non-r…
MCTS-Judge: Test-Time Scaling in LLM-as-a-Judge for Code Correctness Evaluation
The LLM-as-a-Judge paradigm shows promise for evaluating generative content but lacks reliability in reasoning-intensive scenarios, such as programming. Inspired by recent advances in reasoning models and shifts in scali…
global-optimizationLarge Language Model