Beyond the Surface: Enhancing LLM-as-a-Judge Alignment with Human via Internal Representations

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2508.03550v1
• Date: Tue, 05 Aug 2025 15:18:36 GMT
• Title: Beyond the Surface: Enhancing LLM-as-a-Judge Alignment with Human via Internal Representations
• Authors: Peng Lai, Jianjie Zheng, Sijie Cheng, Yun Chen, Peng Li, Yang Liu, Guanhua Chen,
• Abstract summary: "LLMas-a-judge" is a paradigm known as "LLMas-a-judge"<n>We propose LAGER, a framework for enhancing "LLMas-a-judge" alignment with human scoring, via internal representations.<n>We evaluate our method on the standard alignment benchmarks Flask, HelpSteer, and BIGGen using Spearman correlation, and find that LAGER achieves improvements of up to 7.5% over the best baseline across these benchmarks.
• Score: 16.91899150675144
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
• Abstract: The growing scale of evaluation tasks has led to the widespread adoption of automated evaluation using large language models, a paradigm known as "LLMas-a-judge." However, improving its alignment with human preferences without complex prompts or fine-tuning remains challenging. In this work, motivated by preliminary findings that middle-to-upper layers encode semantically and taskrelevant representations that are often more aligned with human judgments than the final layer, we propose LAGER, a lightweight and efficient framework for enhancing LLM-as-a-Judge alignment with human scoring, via internal representations. LAGER produces fine-grained judgment scores by aggregating cross-layer scoretoken logits and computing the expected score from a softmax-based distribution, with the LLM backbone kept frozen. LAGER fully leverages the complementary information across different layers, overcoming the limitations of relying solely on the final layer. We evaluate our method on the standard alignment benchmarks Flask, HelpSteer, and BIGGen using Spearman correlation, and find that LAGER achieves improvements of up to 7.5% over the best baseline across these benchmarks. Without reasoning steps, LAGER matches or outperforms reasoning-based methods. Experiments on downstream applications, such as data selection and emotional understanding, further show the effectiveness of our method.

Related papers

• SPARC: Score Prompting and Adaptive Fusion for Zero-Shot Multi-Label Recognition in Vision-Language Models [74.40683913645731]
  Zero-shot multi-label recognition (MLR) with Vision-Language Models (VLMs) faces significant challenges without training data, model tuning, or architectural modifications.<n>Our work proposes a novel solution treating VLMs as black boxes, leveraging scores without training data or ground truth.<n>Analysis of these prompt scores reveals VLM biases and AND''/OR' signal ambiguities, notably that maximum scores are surprisingly suboptimal compared to second-highest scores.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-24T07:15:05Z)
• Forget What You Know about LLMs Evaluations - LLMs are Like a Chameleon [11.753349115726952]
  Large language models (LLMs) often appear to excel on public benchmarks, but these high scores may mask an overreliance on dataset-specific surface cues.<n>We introduce the Chameleon Benchmark Overfit Detector (C-BOD), a meta-evaluation framework that distorts benchmark prompts.<n>By rephrasing inputs while preserving semantic content and labels, C-BOD exposes whether a model's performance is driven by memorized patterns.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-11T10:43:36Z)
• GLIDER: Grading LLM Interactions and Decisions using Explainable Ranking [0.9614204956530676]
  We introduce GLIDER, a powerful 3B evaluator LLM that can score any text input and associated context on arbitrary user defined criteria.<n>GLIDER shows higher Pearson's correlation than GPT-4o on FLASK and greatly outperforms prior evaluation models.<n>It supports fine-grained scoring, multilingual reasoning, span highlighting and was trained on 685 domains and 183 criteria.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-18T18:41:12Z)
• CogSteer: Cognition-Inspired Selective Layer Intervention for Efficiently Steering Large Language Models [37.476241509187304]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) achieve remarkable performance through pretraining on extensive data.<n>The lack of interpretability in their underlying mechanisms limits the ability to effectively steer LLMs for specific applications.<n>We introduce an efficient selective layer intervention based on prominent parameter-efficient fine-tuning methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-23T09:40:15Z)
• Fairer Preferences Elicit Improved Human-Aligned Large Language Model Judgments [41.25558612970942]
  We show that large language models (LLMs) exhibit preference biases and worrying sensitivity to prompt designs. Motivated by this phenomenon, we propose an automatic Zero-shot Evaluation-oriented Prompt Optimization framework, ZEPO.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-17T09:48:53Z)
• Spread Preference Annotation: Direct Preference Judgment for Efficient LLM Alignment [72.99676237703099]
  We propose a new framework that boosts the alignment of large language models with human preferences.<n>Our key idea is leveraging the human prior knowledge within the small (seed) data.<n>We introduce a noise-aware preference learning algorithm to mitigate the risk of low quality within generated preference data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-06T18:01:02Z)
• Self-Exploring Language Models: Active Preference Elicitation for Online Alignment [88.56809269990625]
  We propose a bilevel objective optimistically biased towards potentially high-reward responses to actively explore out-of-distribution regions. Our experimental results demonstrate that when fine-tuned on Zephyr-7B-SFT and Llama-3-8B-Instruct models, Self-Exploring Language Models (SELM) significantly boosts the performance on instruction-following benchmarks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-29T17:59:07Z)
• PiCO: Peer Review in LLMs based on the Consistency Optimization [48.48819141999387]
  We use peer-review mechanisms to measure large language models (LLMs) automatically.<n>We formalize it as a constrained optimization problem, intending to maximize the consistency of each LLM's capabilities and scores.<n>We propose three metrics called PEN, CIN, and LIS to evaluate the gap in aligning human rankings.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-02T18:49:26Z)
• Accelerating LLaMA Inference by Enabling Intermediate Layer Decoding via Instruction Tuning with LITE [62.13435256279566]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have achieved remarkable performance across a wide variety of natural language tasks. However, their large size makes their inference slow and computationally expensive. We show that it enables these layers to acquire 'good' generation ability without affecting the generation ability of the final layer.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-28T04:07:58Z)
• Outlier Weighed Layerwise Sparsity (OWL): A Missing Secret Sauce for Pruning LLMs to High Sparsity [88.62935593360162]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are renowned for their remarkable performance across diverse domains.<n>We introduce a novel LLM pruning methodology that incorporates a tailored set of non-uniform layerwise sparsity ratios, termed as Outlier Weighed Layerwise sparsity (OWL)<n>OWL exhibits a remarkable performance gain, surpassing the state-of-the-art Wanda and SparseGPT by 61.22 and 6.80 perplexity at a high sparsity level of 70%, respectively.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-08T14:22:58Z)
• RLAIF vs. RLHF: Scaling Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback with AI Feedback [5.3113139864044046]
  Reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF) has proven effective in aligning large language models (LLMs) with human preferences, but gathering high-quality preference labels is expensive. RLAIF offers a promising alternative that trains the reward model (RM) on preferences generated by an off-the-shelf LLM. Our results suggest that RLAIF can achieve performance on-par with using human feedback, offering a potential solution to the scalability limitations of RLHF.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-01T05:53:33Z)

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.