# Self-Judge: Selective Instruction Following with Alignment Self-Evaluation

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2409.00935 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2409.00935/

## Key facts

- Cited by 7 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in LLM preference optimization methods, one of 10 directions in LLM alignment / RLHF / preference optimisation.
- Builds on 16 of its 36 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 2 Sep 2024.

## Placed in

- LLM alignment / RLHF / preference optimisation / [LLM preference optimization methods](https://mlsanity.com/alignment/llm-preference-optimization-methods/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 16 of 16)

- [Training language models to follow instructions with human feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.02155/) (2022)
- [Direct Preference Optimization: Your Language Model is Secretly a Reward Model](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.18290/) (2023)
- [QLoRA: Efficient Finetuning of Quantized LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.14314/) (2023)
- [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)
- [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)
- [COMET: A Neural Framework for MT Evaluation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2009.09025/) (2020)
- [Enhancing Chat Language Models by Scaling High-quality Instructional Conversations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.14233/) (2023)
- [AlpacaFarm: A Simulation Framework for Methods that Learn from Human Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.14387/) (2023)
- [The Flan Collection: Designing Data and Methods for Effective Instruction Tuning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2301.13688/) (2023)
- [Principle-Driven Self-Alignment of Language Models from Scratch with Minimal Human Supervision](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.03047/) (2023)
- [PandaLM: An Automatic Evaluation Benchmark for LLM Instruction Tuning Optimization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.05087/) (2023)
- [Selective Question Answering under Domain Shift](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2006.09462/) (2020)
- [Out-of-Distribution Detection and Selective Generation for Conditional Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2209.15558/) (2022)
- [Shepherd: A Critic for Language Model Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.04592/) (2023)

## Built on by (most cited first, 7 of 7)

- [LLMs-as-Judges: A Comprehensive Survey on LLM-based Evaluation Methods](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.05579/) (2024)
- [LLM Post-Training: A Deep Dive into Reasoning Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.21321/) (2025)
- [A Survey on Data Synthesis and Augmentation for Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.12896/) (2024)
- [Beyond the Surface: Enhancing LLM-as-a-Judge Alignment with Human via Internal Representations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2508.03550/) (2025)
- [Honesty to Subterfuge: In-Context Reinforcement Learning Can Make Honest Models Reward Hack](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.06491/) (2024)
- [Fragile Preferences: A Deep Dive Into Order Effects in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.14092/) (2025)
- [SCAN: Structured Capability Assessment and Navigation for LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.06698/) (2025)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Pre-trained large language models (LLMs) can be tailored to adhere to human instructions through instruction tuning. However, due to shifts in the distribution of test-time data, they may not always execute instructions accurately, potentially generating factual errors or misaligned content when acting as chat assistants. To enhance the reliability of LLMs in following instructions, we propose the study of selective instruction following, whereby the system declines to execute instructions if the anticipated response quality is low. We train judge models that can predict numerical quality scores for model responses. To address data scarcity, we introduce Self-J, a novel self-training framework for developing judge models without needing human-annotated quality scores. Our method leverages the model's inherent self-evaluation capability to extract information about response quality from labeled instruction-tuning data. It incorporates a gold reference answer to facilitate self-evaluation and recalibrates by assessing the semantic similarity between the response sample and the gold reference. During the training phase, we implement self-distillation as a regularization technique to enhance the capability of reference-free estimation. To validate alignment evaluation on general instruction-following tasks, we collect large-scale high-quality instructions from Hugging Face for model training and evaluation. Extensive experiments on five open-source models show that our method correlates much more with GPT-4 than strong baselines, e.g., supervised models distilled from GPT-4 and GPT-3.5-turbo. Our analysis shows our model's strong generalization across domains. Additionally, our judge models serve as good reward models, e.g., boosting WizardLM-13B-V1.2 from 89.17 to 92.48 and from 12.03 to 15.90 in version v1 and v2 of AlpacaEval respectively using best-of-32 sampling with our judge models.