VERDI: Single-Call Confidence Estimation for Verification-Based LLM Judges via Decomposed Inference
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.11334v1
- Date: Mon, 11 May 2026 23:39:19 GMT
- Title: VERDI: Single-Call Confidence Estimation for Verification-Based LLM Judges via Decomposed Inference
- Abstract summary: VERDI (VERification-Decomposed Inference Inference) is a method that extracts confidence from a structured judge.<n> VERDI decomposes each evaluation into sub-checks and derives three structural signals.<n>On three public benchmarks, VERDI achieves AUROC 0.72-0.91 on GPT-4.1-mini and 0.66-0.80 on GPT-5.4-mini.
- Score: 0.0
- License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
- Abstract: LLM-as-Judge systems are widely deployed for automated evaluation, yet practitioners lack reliable methods to know when a judge's verdict should be trusted. Token log-probabilities, the standard post-hoc confidence signal, are unavailable for many commercial LLMs and, even when accessible, saturate above 0.999 with structured JSON output. We introduce VERDI (VERification-Decomposed Inference), a method that extracts confidence from the reasoning trace a structured judge already produces, with no additional inference calls. VERDI decomposes each verification-style evaluation into sub-checks and derives three structural signals: Step-Verdict Alignment, Claim-Level Margin, and Evidence Grounding Score. We combine them with Platt-scaled logistic regression. On three public benchmarks, VERDI achieves AUROC 0.72-0.91 on GPT-4.1-mini and 0.66-0.80 on GPT-5.4-mini. On Qwen3.5-4B/9B/27B, where answer-token logprobs are anti-calibrated (higher confidence on errors, AUROC 0.32-0.49), VERDI achieves 0.56-0.70. We additionally validate on a production system with eight rubrics (AUROC 0.73-0.88 on factual rubrics), demonstrate cross-model transfer (AUROC 0.66-0.69), and show that a 33M-parameter NLI (Natural Language Inference) model provides a scalable alternative to regex extraction.
Related papers
- Beyond Local Accuracy: A Protocol-Level Identifiability Audit for Controlled LLM Reasoning Evaluation [6.047519836191728]
We formalize a protocol-level identifiability audit over a finite behavioral policy class.<n>The audit requires zero model calls and resolves our diagnostic case.<n>This case shows how evaluation-design validity can be checked structurally before model inference.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-08-13T14:49:47Z) - LLM-as-a-Verifier: A General-Purpose Verification Framework [74.40111651545979]
We introduce LLM-as-a-Verifier, a general-purpose verification framework.<n>It provides fine-grained feedback for agentic tasks without requiring additional training.<n>It achieves state-of-the-art performance on several benchmarks.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-07-06T17:59:35Z) - Evidence-Grounded Ensemble Diagnosis of 802.11 Packet Captures: A Multi-Stage Pipeline with Deterministic Reliability Scoring [1.0170129555792935]
Diagnosing 802.11 packet captures requires expert protocol knowledge, is slow, inconsistent across engineers, and unscalable.<n>LLM-based approaches sound plausible but fabricate protocol events absent from captures, produce uncalibrated confidence scores, and suffer evaluation bias when golden references are co-produced by the model under test.<n>We introduce PROBE, a multi-stage pipeline addressing all three failures.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-06-05T03:39:58Z) - When the Ruler is Broken: Parsing-Induced Suppression in LLM-Based Security Log Evaluation [0.0]
We demonstrate a class of silent, systematic evaluation errors that can cause a fully functional model to appear completely non-functional categories.<n>We propose SOC-Bench v0, a benchmark framework comprising a standardized 13 category threat taxonomy, minimum statistical power requirements, fuzzy field extraction specification, and a public scoring script intended to prevent specific accuracy distortion in future SOC research.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-05-08T06:03:11Z) - What Single-Prompt Accuracy Misses: A Multi-Variant Reliability Audit of Language Models [0.0]
Single-prompt accuracy is the dominant way to benchmark language models, but it can miss reliability failures that matter.<n>We evaluate a 15-model open-weight corpus, with the main reliability analyses focused on 10 instruct models across five classification and reasoning benchmarks.<n>We find three broad results. First, evaluation design can materially change the conclusion.<n>Second, confidence signals are fragile. On MMLU-Pro, every primary model verbally reports confidence substantially above both its accuracy and its token-probability confidence on the same rows, and verbal parse rate can collapse for a single model on a single prompt variant.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-05-03T20:05:08Z) - The Surprising Universality of LLM Outputs: A Real-Time Verification Primitive [0.0]
CPU-only scoring primitive runs at 2.6 microseconds per token.<n> token rank-frequency distributions converge to the same two- parameter Mandelbrot ranking distribution.<n>We derive a single-pass scoring primitive that composes with model log probabilities when available and degrades to a rank-only mode usable on closed APIs.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-04-28T13:35:31Z) - The Verification Tax: Fundamental Limits of AI Auditing in the Rare-Error Regime [0.0]
Most cited calibration result in deep learning -- post-temperature-scaling ECE of 0.012 on CIFAR-100 -- is below the statistical noise floor.<n>We prove this is not a failure of the experiment but a law: the minimax rate for estimating calibration error with model error rate epsilon is Theta((Lepsilon/m)2/3), and no estimator can beat it.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-04-14T16:48:24Z) - CoRefine: Confidence-Guided Self-Refinement for Adaptive Test-Time Compute [10.548368675645403]
CoRefine is a confidence-guided self-refinement method that achieves competitive accuracy using a fraction of the tokens.<n>The controller consumes full-trace confidence to decide whether to halt, re-examine, or try a different approach.<n>We extend this to CoRefine-Tree, a hybrid sequential-parallel variant that adaptively balances exploration and exploitation.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-02-09T17:44:41Z) - CARE What Fails: Contrastive Anchored-REflection for Verifiable Multimodal [84.71254539482369]
Group-relative reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) often wastes the most informative data it already has the failures.<n>We present CARE, a failure-centric post-training framework for multimodal reasoning that turns errors into supervision.<n> CARE improves accuracy and training smoothness while explicitly increasing the share of learning signal that comes from failures.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-12-22T16:34:21Z) - CLUE: Non-parametric Verification from Experience via Hidden-State Clustering [64.50919789875233]
We show that correctness of a solution is encoded as a geometrically separable signature within the trajectory of hidden activations.<n>ClUE consistently outperforms LLM-as-a-judge baselines and matches or exceeds modern confidence-based methods in reranking candidates.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-10-02T02:14:33Z) - Reference-Free Rating of LLM Responses via Latent Information [53.463883683503106]
We study the common practice of asking a judge model to assign Likert-scale scores to free-text responses.<n>We then propose and evaluate Latent Judges, which derive scalar ratings from internal model signals.<n>Across a broad suite of pairwise and single-rating benchmarks, latent methods match or surpass standard prompting.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-09-29T12:15:52Z) - TrustJudge: Inconsistencies of LLM-as-a-Judge and How to Alleviate Them [58.04324690859212]
Large Language Models (LLMs) as automated evaluators (LLM-as-a-judge) has revealed critical inconsistencies in current evaluation frameworks.<n>We identify two fundamental types of inconsistencies: Score-Comparison Inconsistency and Pairwise Transitivity Inconsistency.<n>We propose TrustJudge, a probabilistic framework that addresses these limitations through two key innovations.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-09-25T13:04:29Z) - Sparse Conditional Hidden Markov Model for Weakly Supervised Named
Entity Recognition [68.68300358332156]
We propose the sparse conditional hidden Markov model (Sparse-CHMM) to evaluate noisy labeling functions.
Sparse-CHMM is optimized through unsupervised learning with a three-stage training pipeline.
It achieves a 3.01 average F1 score improvement on five comprehensive datasets.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-05-27T20:47:30Z)
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.