Improving Preference Extraction In LLMs By Identifying Latent Knowledge Through Classifying Probes
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Large Language Models (LLMs) are often used as automated judges to evaluate text, but their effectiveness can be hindered by various unintentional biases. We propose using linear classifying probes, trained by leveraging differences between contrasting pairs of prompts, to directly access LLMs' latent knowledge and extract more accurate preferences. Through extensive experiments using models of varying size from four different families and six diverse datasets assessing text quality evaluation and common sense reasoning, we demonstrate that both supervised and unsupervised probing approaches consistently outperform traditional generation-based judgement while maintaining similar computational costs. These probes generalise under domain shifts and can even outperform finetuned evaluators with the same training data size. Our results suggest linear probing offers an accurate, robust and computationally efficient approach for LLM-as-judge tasks while providing interpretable insights into how models encode judgement-relevant knowledge. Our data and code will be openly released in the future.
Key facts. Cited by 9 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 41 of its 59 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 22 Mar 2025.
Builds on
41 of 59 references.
References · 41
- 2024The Llama 3 Herd of Modelscited by 14,192
- 2023Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arenacited by 8,393
- 2024Qwen2.5 Technical Reportcited by 4,713
- 2017Deep reinforcement learning from human preferencescited by 3,846
- 2022Training a Helpful and Harmless Assistant with Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedbackcited by 3,634
- 2020Learning to summarize from human feedbackcited by 2,562
- 2023G-Eval: NLG Evaluation using GPT-4 with Better Human Alignmentcited by 2,205
- 2016Understanding intermediate layers using linear classifier probescited by 1,279
- 2023Steering Llama 2 via Contrastive Activation Additioncited by 1,009
- 2024Refusal in Language Models Is Mediated by a Single Directioncited by 960
- 2021Ethical and social risks of harm from Language Modelscited by 957
- 2022Discovering Latent Knowledge in Language Models Without Supervisioncited by 733
29 more
- 2023Can Large Language Models Be an Alternative to Human Evaluations?cited by 729
- 2023ChatEval: Towards Better LLM-based Evaluators through Multi-Agent Debatecited by 724
- 2023The Geometry of Truth: Emergent Linear Structure in Large Language Model Representations of True/False Datasetscited by 673
- 2020SummEval: Re-evaluating Summarization Evaluationcited by 666
- 2023Eliciting Latent Predictions from Transformers with the Tuned Lenscited by 579
- 2018What you can cram into a single vector: Probing sentence embeddings for linguistic propertiescited by 452
- 2023Is ChatGPT a Good NLG Evaluator? A Preliminary Studycited by 420
- 2022Emergent World Representations: Exploring a Sequence Model Trained on a Synthetic Taskcited by 417
- 2016A Corpus and Evaluation Framework for Deeper Understanding of Commonsense Storiescited by 413
- 2023Large Language Models are Zero-Shot Rankers for Recommender Systemscited by 307
- 2024Replacing Judges with Juries: Evaluating LLM Generations with a Panel of Diverse Modelscited by 301
- 2018Newsroom: A Dataset of 1.3 Million Summaries with Diverse Extractive Strategiescited by 292
- 2021Unsolved Problems in ML Safetycited by 291
- 2023Evaluating Large Language Models at Evaluating Instruction Followingcited by 290
- 2022Towards a Unified Multi-Dimensional Evaluator for Text Generationcited by 264
- 2024Aligning with Human Judgement: The Role of Pairwise Preference in Large Language Model Evaluatorscited by 146
- 2019"Going on a vacation" takes longer than "Going for a walk": A Study of Temporal Commonsense Understandingcited by 121
- 2021Truthful AI: Developing and governing AI that does not liecited by 109
- 2023Exploring the Use of Large Language Models for Reference-Free Text Quality Evaluation: An Empirical Studycited by 85
- 2025Learning to Plan & Reason for Evaluation with Thinking-LLM-as-a-Judgecited by 75
- 2023LLM Comparative Assessment: Zero-shot NLG Evaluation through Pairwise Comparisons using Large Language Modelscited by 66
- 2024Do Language Models Enjoy Their Own Stories? Prompting Large Language Models for Automatic Story Evaluationcited by 32
- 2023Challenges with unsupervised LLM knowledge discoverycited by 30
- 2024Fairer Preferences Elicit Improved Human-Aligned Large Language Model Judgmentscited by 25
- 2023Localizing Lying in Llama: Understanding Instructed Dishonesty on True-False Questions Through Prompting, Probing, and Patchingcited by 24
- 2024PROXYQA: An Alternative Framework for Evaluating Long-Form Text Generation with Large Language Modelscited by 23
- 2024Applicability of Large Language Models and Generative Models for Legal Case Judgement Summarizationcited by 23
- 2024From Calculation to Adjudication: Examining LLM judges on Mathematical Reasoning Taskscited by 22
- 2024Cluster-norm for Unsupervised Probing of Knowledgecited by 4
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 3; 2026: 6.
9 papers.
- 2025Beyond Token Probes: Hallucination Detection via Activation Tensors with ACT-ViTcited by 16
- 2025Reference-Free Rating of LLM Responses via Latent Informationcited by 4
- 2025One Leak Away: How Pretrained Model Exposure Amplifies Jailbreak Risks in Finetuned LLMscited by 1
- 2026When Persona Attributes Improve Population Alignment in Large Language Modelscited by 1
- 2026BoRP: Bootstrapped Regression Probing for Scalable and Human-Aligned LLM Evaluationcited by 0
- 2026Low-Resource Preference Adaptation of LLMs via Activation-Based Label Propagationcited by 0
- 2026Wrong Prediction, Right Answer: Recovering Evidence from Collapsed LLM Sequence Scorescited by 0
- 2026MedProb: Probing Internal Representations of Vision-Language Models for Medical Question Answeringcited by 0
- 2026Opening LLM Judges: Recovering Preference Signals Beyond the Final Verdictcited by 0
- 2026Opening LLM Judges: Recovering Preference Signals Beyond the Final Verdict26 Sep 2026
- 2026MedProb: Probing Internal Representations of Vision-Language Models for Medical Question Answering3 Sep 2026
- 2026When Persona Attributes Improve Population Alignment in Large Language Models2 Sep 2026
- 2026Wrong Prediction, Right Answer: Recovering Evidence from Collapsed LLM Sequence Scores31 Aug 2026
- 2026Low-Resource Preference Adaptation of LLMs via Activation-Based Label Propagation31 Aug 2026
- 2026BoRP: Bootstrapped Regression Probing for Scalable and Human-Aligned LLM Evaluation26 Jan 2026
- 2025One Leak Away: How Pretrained Model Exposure Amplifies Jailbreak Risks in Finetuned LLMs14 Dec 2025
- 2025Beyond Token Probes: Hallucination Detection via Activation Tensors with ACT-ViT30 Sep 2025
- 2025Reference-Free Rating of LLM Responses via Latent Information29 Sep 2025
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026Automated Concept Discovery for LLM-as-a-Judge Preference Analysis
- 2025Improving LLM-as-a-Judge Inference with the Judgment Distribution
- 2025Leveraging LLMs as Meta-Judges: A Multi-Agent Framework for Evaluating LLM Judgments
- 2026JudgeStealer: Extracting LLM Judging Capabilities across Evaluation Protocols
- 2025JudgeAgent: Beyond Static Benchmarks for Knowledge-Driven and Dynamic LLM Evaluation
- 2024PANDA: Preference Adaptation for Enhancing Domain-Specific Abilities of LLMs
- 2026A Judge-Aware Ranking Framework for Evaluating Large Language Models without Ground Truth
- 2024Optimizing Alignment with Less: Leveraging Data Augmentation for Personalized Evaluation