Training an LLM-as-a-Judge Model: Pipeline, Insights, and Practical Lessons
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2502.02988v1
- Date: Wed, 05 Feb 2025 08:35:55 GMT
- Title: Training an LLM-as-a-Judge Model: Pipeline, Insights, and Practical Lessons
- Authors: Renjun Hu, Yi Cheng, Libin Meng, Jiaxin Xia, Yi Zong, Xing Shi, Wei Lin,
- Abstract summary: This paper introduces Themis, a fine-tuned large language model (LLMs) judge that delivers context-aware evaluations.
We provide a comprehensive overview of the development pipeline for Themis, highlighting its scenario-dependent evaluation prompts.
We introduce two human-labeled benchmarks for meta-evaluation, demonstrating that Themis can achieve high alignment with human preferences in an economical manner.
- Score: 9.954960702259918
- License:
- Abstract: The rapid advancement of large language models (LLMs) has opened new possibilities for their adoption as evaluative judges. This paper introduces Themis, a fine-tuned LLM judge that delivers sophisticated context-aware evaluations. We provide a comprehensive overview of the development pipeline for Themis, highlighting its scenario-dependent evaluation prompts and two novel methods for controlled instruction generation. These designs enable Themis to effectively distill evaluative skills from teacher models, while retaining flexibility for continuous development. We introduce two human-labeled benchmarks for meta-evaluation, demonstrating that Themis can achieve high alignment with human preferences in an economical manner. Additionally, we explore insights into the LLM-as-a-judge paradigm, revealing nuances in performance and the varied effects of reference answers. Notably, we observe that pure knowledge distillation from strong LLMs, though common, does not guarantee performance improvement through scaling. We propose a mitigation strategy based on instruction-following difficulty. Furthermore, we provide practical guidelines covering data balancing, prompt customization, multi-objective training, and metric aggregation. We aim for our method and findings, along with the fine-tuning data, benchmarks, and model checkpoints, to support future research and development in this area.
Related papers
- Improve LLM-as-a-Judge Ability as a General Ability [40.2210529561692]
Large language models (LLMs) can evaluate responses across diverse scenarios, providing accurate preference signals.
Recent studies have raised many methods to train LLM as generative judges, but most of them are data consuming or lack accuracy.
In this work, we implement a two-stage training approach, comprising supervised fine-tuning (SFT) warm-up and direct preference optimization (DPO) enhancement.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-02-17T11:28:43Z) - The Vulnerability of Language Model Benchmarks: Do They Accurately Reflect True LLM Performance? [1.3810901729134184]
Large Language Models (LLMs) excel at standardized tests while failing to demonstrate genuine language understanding and adaptability.
Our systematic analysis of NLP evaluation frameworks reveals pervasive vulnerabilities across the evaluation spectrum.
We lay the groundwork for new evaluation methods that resist manipulation, minimize data contamination, and assess domain-specific tasks.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-12-02T20:49:21Z) - MME-Survey: A Comprehensive Survey on Evaluation of Multimodal LLMs [97.94579295913606]
Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) have garnered increased attention from both industry and academia.
In the development process, evaluation is critical since it provides intuitive feedback and guidance on improving models.
This work aims to offer researchers an easy grasp of how to effectively evaluate MLLMs according to different needs and to inspire better evaluation methods.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-11-22T18:59:54Z) - Benchmarks as Microscopes: A Call for Model Metrology [76.64402390208576]
Modern language models (LMs) pose a new challenge in capability assessment.
To be confident in our metrics, we need a new discipline of model metrology.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-07-22T17:52:12Z) - MR-Ben: A Meta-Reasoning Benchmark for Evaluating System-2 Thinking in LLMs [55.20845457594977]
Large language models (LLMs) have shown increasing capability in problem-solving and decision-making.
We present a process-based benchmark MR-Ben that demands a meta-reasoning skill.
Our meta-reasoning paradigm is especially suited for system-2 slow thinking.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-06-20T03:50:23Z) - Enhancing Trust in LLMs: Algorithms for Comparing and Interpreting LLMs [1.0878040851638]
This paper surveys evaluation techniques to enhance the trustworthiness and understanding of Large Language Models (LLMs)
Key evaluation metrics include Perplexity Measurement, NLP metrics (BLEU, ROUGE, METEOR, BERTScore, GLEU, Word Error Rate, Character Error Rate), Zero-Shot and Few-Shot Learning Performance, Transfer Learning Evaluation, Adversarial Testing, and Fairness and Bias Evaluation.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-06-04T03:54:53Z) - DnA-Eval: Enhancing Large Language Model Evaluation through Decomposition and Aggregation [75.81096662788254]
Large Language Models (LLMs) are scalable and economical evaluators.
The question of how reliable these evaluators are has emerged as a crucial research question.
We propose Decompose and Aggregate, which breaks down the evaluation process into different stages based on pedagogical practices.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-05-24T08:12:30Z) - LLM In-Context Recall is Prompt Dependent [0.0]
A model's ability to do this significantly influences its practical efficacy and dependability in real-world applications.
This study demonstrates that an LLM's recall capability is not only contingent upon the prompt's content but also may be compromised by biases in its training data.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-04-13T01:13:59Z) - QualEval: Qualitative Evaluation for Model Improvement [82.73561470966658]
We propose QualEval, which augments quantitative scalar metrics with automated qualitative evaluation as a vehicle for model improvement.
QualEval uses a powerful LLM reasoner and our novel flexible linear programming solver to generate human-readable insights.
We demonstrate that leveraging its insights, for example, improves the absolute performance of the Llama 2 model by up to 15% points relative.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-11-06T00:21:44Z) - Evaluating Large Language Models at Evaluating Instruction Following [54.49567482594617]
We introduce a challenging meta-evaluation benchmark, LLMBar, designed to test the ability of an LLM evaluator in discerning instruction-following outputs.
We discover that different evaluators exhibit distinct performance on LLMBar and even the highest-scoring ones have substantial room for improvement.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-10-11T16:38:11Z)
This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.
This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.