Tag
This paper extends missing-information stress-testing to open-ended medical conversation, finding that LLM judge choice materially changes apparent safety and that LLM judges are more permissive than clinicians.
This paper audits the reliability of LLM-as-judge evaluation by showing that changing the evaluator model can shift scores even when candidate responses are fixed, and it examines scaling and upgrade paths for Qwen3 and MiniMax models, concluding that judge upgrades are not interchangeable and proposing best practices for reporting.
This paper investigates the run-to-run reliability of LLM-as-a-Judge evaluations, finding that pairwise preferences flip 13.6% of the time on average, with significant first-position bias in GPT-4o-mini, and recommends multi-trial aggregation and position randomization.