# Generative Judge for Evaluating Alignment

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2310.05470 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.05470/

## Key facts

- Cited by 169 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 41 of its 60 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 9 Oct 2023.

## Builds on (most cited first, 30 of 41)

- [BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understanding](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1810.04805/) (2018)
- [Language Models are Few-Shot Learners](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.14165/) (2020)
- [GPT-4 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.08774/) (2023)
- [Training language models to follow instructions with human feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.02155/) (2022)
- [LLaMA: Open and Efficient Foundation Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.13971/) (2023)
- [Llama 2: Open Foundation and Fine-Tuned Chat Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.09288/) (2023)
- [Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arena](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.05685/) (2023)
- [BART: Denoising Sequence-to-Sequence Pre-training for Natural Language Generation, Translation, and Comprehension](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1910.13461/) (2019)
- [BERTScore: Evaluating Text Generation with BERT](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1904.09675/) (2019)
- [PaLM: Scaling Language Modeling with Pathways](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2204.02311/) (2022)
- [Let's Verify Step by Step](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.20050/) (2023)
- [Training a Helpful and Harmless Assistant with Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2204.05862/) (2022)
- [FlashAttention: Fast and Memory-Efficient Exact Attention with IO-Awareness](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2205.14135/) (2022)
- [Distributed Representations of Words and Phrases and their Compositionality](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1310.4546/) (2013)
- [Constitutional AI: Harmlessness from AI Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.08073/) (2022)
- [Self-Instruct: Aligning Language Models with Self-Generated Instructions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.10560/) (2022)
- [FlashAttention-2: Faster Attention with Better Parallelism and Work Partitioning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.08691/) (2023)
- [Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.12712/) (2023)
- [Learning to summarize from human feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2009.01325/) (2020)
- [Deep contextualized word representations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1802.05365/) (2018)
- [G-Eval: NLG Evaluation using GPT-4 with Better Human Alignment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.16634/) (2023)
- [Fine-Tuning Language Models from Human Preferences](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1909.08593/) (2019)
- [WebGPT: Browser-assisted question-answering with human feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2112.09332/) (2021)
- [WizardLM: Empowering large pre-trained language models to follow complex instructions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.12244/) (2023)
- [LIMA: Less Is More for Alignment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.11206/) (2023)
- [Scaling Laws for Reward Model Overoptimization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.10760/) (2022)
- [Large Language Models are not Fair Evaluators](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.17926/) (2023)
- [BeaverTails: Towards Improved Safety Alignment of LLM via a Human-Preference Dataset](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.04657/) (2023)
- [Training Deep Nets with Sublinear Memory Cost](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1604.06174/) (2016)
- [AlpacaFarm: A Simulation Framework for Methods that Learn from Human Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.14387/) (2023)

## Built on by (most cited first, 30 of 169)

- [RewardBench: Evaluating Reward Models for Language Modeling](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.13787/) (2024)
- [LLMs-as-Judges: A Comprehensive Survey on LLM-based Evaluation Methods](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.05579/) (2024)
- [MLLM-as-a-Judge: Assessing Multimodal LLM-as-a-Judge with Vision-Language Benchmark](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.04788/) (2024)
- [JudgeLM: Fine-tuned Large Language Models are Scalable Judges](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.17631/) (2023)
- [JudgeBench: A Benchmark for Evaluating LLM-based Judges](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.12784/) (2024)
- [A Survey on Knowledge Distillation of Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.13116/) (2024)
- [Improving Video Generation with Human Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.13918/) (2025)
- [Self-Play Preference Optimization for Language Model Alignment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.00675/) (2024)
- [Judging the Judges: Evaluating Alignment and Vulnerabilities in LLMs-as-Judges](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.12624/) (2024)
- [Advancing LLM Reasoning Generalists with Preference Trees](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.02078/) (2024)
- [A Survey of Reinforcement Learning for Large Reasoning Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.08827/) (2025)
- [Optimization-based Prompt Injection Attack to LLM-as-a-Judge](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.17710/) (2024)
- [A Survey of Frontiers in LLM Reasoning: Inference Scaling, Learning to Reason, and Agentic Systems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.09037/) (2025)
- [Critique-out-Loud Reward Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2408.11791/) (2024)
- [The BiGGen Bench: A Principled Benchmark for Fine-grained Evaluation of Language Models with Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.05761/) (2024)
- [Alignment for Honesty](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2312.07000/) (2023)
- [LLM-based NLG Evaluation: Current Status and Challenges](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.01383/) (2024)
- [Systematic Evaluation of LLM-as-a-Judge in LLM Alignment Tasks: Explainable Metrics and Diverse Prompt Templates](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2408.13006/) (2024)
- [Self-Generated Critiques Boost Reward Modeling for Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2411.16646/) (2024)
- [A Comprehensive Survey of Reward Models: Taxonomy, Applications, Challenges, and Future](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.12328/) (2025)
- [Writing-Zero: Bridge the Gap Between Non-verifiable Tasks and Verifiable Rewards](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.00103/) (2025)
- [Improving Reward Models with Synthetic Critiques](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.20850/) (2024)
- [Evaluating Judges as Evaluators: The JETTS Benchmark of LLM-as-Judges as Test-Time Scaling Evaluators](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.15253/) (2025)
- [CompassJudger-1: All-in-one Judge Model Helps Model Evaluation and Evolution](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.16256/) (2024)
- [CompassVerifier: A Unified and Robust Verifier for LLMs Evaluation and Outcome Reward](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2508.03686/) (2025)
- [Neither Valid nor Reliable? Investigating the Use of LLMs as Judges](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2508.18076/) (2025)
- [LLMs Cannot Reliably Judge (Yet?): A Comprehensive Assessment on the Robustness of LLM-as-a-Judge](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.09443/) (2025)
- [Play Favorites: A Statistical Method to Measure Self-Bias in LLM-as-a-Judge](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2508.06709/) (2025)
- [Evaluating the Evaluator: Measuring LLMs' Adherence to Task Evaluation Instructions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2408.08781/) (2024)
- [Direct Judgement Preference Optimization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2409.14664/) (2024)

## Abstract (arXiv)

The rapid development of Large Language Models (LLMs) has substantially expanded the range of tasks they can address. In the field of Natural Language Processing (NLP), researchers have shifted their focus from conventional NLP tasks (e.g., sequence tagging and parsing) towards tasks that revolve around aligning with human needs (e.g., brainstorming and email writing). This shift in task distribution imposes new requirements on evaluating these aligned models regarding generality (i.e., assessing performance across diverse scenarios), flexibility (i.e., examining under different protocols), and interpretability (i.e., scrutinizing models with explanations). In this paper, we propose a generative judge with 13B parameters, Auto-J, designed to address these challenges. Our model is trained on user queries and LLM-generated responses under massive real-world scenarios and accommodates diverse evaluation protocols (e.g., pairwise response comparison and single-response evaluation) with well-structured natural language critiques. To demonstrate the efficacy of our approach, we construct a new testbed covering 58 different scenarios. Experimentally, Auto-J outperforms a series of strong competitors, including both open-source and closed-source models, by a large margin. We also provide detailed analysis and case studies to further reveal the potential of our method and make a variety of resources public at https://github.com/GAIR-NLP/auto-j.