Beyond Single-Point Judgment: Distribution Alignment for LLM-as-a-Judge
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
LLMs have emerged as powerful evaluators in the LLM-as-a-Judge paradigm, offering significant efficiency and flexibility compared to human judgments. However, previous methods primarily rely on single-point evaluations, overlooking the inherent diversity and uncertainty in human evaluations. This approach leads to information loss and decreases the reliability of evaluations. To address this limitation, we propose a novel training framework that explicitly aligns the LLM-generated judgment distribution with empirical human distributions. Specifically, we propose a distributional alignment objective based on KL divergence, combined with an auxiliary cross-entropy regularization to stabilize the training process. Furthermore, considering that empirical distributions may derive from limited human annotations, we incorporate adversarial training to enhance model robustness against distribution perturbations. Extensive experiments across various LLM backbones and evaluation tasks demonstrate that our framework significantly outperforms existing closed-source LLMs and conventional single-point alignment methods, with improved alignment quality, evaluation accuracy, and robustness.
Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 33 of its 39 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 18 May 2025.
Builds on
33 of 39 references.
References · 33
- 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,419
- 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,971
- 2022Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Modelscited by 12,459
- 2015Distilling the Knowledge in a Neural Networkcited by 10,324
- 2023Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arenacited by 8,626
- 2014Explaining and Harnessing Adversarial Examplescited by 7,364
- 2017Towards Deep Learning Models Resistant to Adversarial Attackscited by 6,415
- 2024Qwen2.5 Technical Reportcited by 4,942
- 2023Reflexion: Language Agents with Verbal Reinforcement Learningcited by 4,276
- 2017A Broad-Coverage Challenge Corpus for Sentence Understanding through Inferencecited by 2,682
- 2023A Survey of Large Language Modelscited by 2,576
- 2023G-Eval: NLG Evaluation using GPT-4 with Better Human Alignmentcited by 2,276
21 more
- 2015A large annotated corpus for learning natural language inferencecited by 1,847
- 2024A Survey on LLM-as-a-Judgecited by 1,423
- 2020SummEval: Re-evaluating Summarization Evaluationcited by 674
- 2016CVXPY: A Python-Embedded Modeling Language for Convex Optimizationcited by 641
- 2017Adversarial Examples for Evaluating Reading Comprehension Systemscited by 571
- 2024LLMs-as-Judges: A Comprehensive Survey on LLM-based Evaluation Methodscited by 465
- 2023Towards Measuring the Representation of Subjective Global Opinions in Language Modelscited by 437
- 2023JudgeLM: Fine-tuned Large Language Models are Scalable Judgescited by 367
- 2016Adversarial Training Methods for Semi-Supervised Text Classificationcited by 280
- 2024WildBench: Benchmarking LLMs with Challenging Tasks from Real Users in the Wildcited by 218
- 2023Evaluating the Logical Reasoning Ability of ChatGPT and GPT-4cited by 202
- 2023FLASK: Fine-grained Language Model Evaluation based on Alignment Skill Setscited by 201
- 2023Distributional Preference Learning: Understanding and Accounting for Hidden Context in RLHFcited by 133
- 2023Human-like Summarization Evaluation with ChatGPTcited by 126
- 2024Quantile Regression for Distributional Reward Models in RLHFcited by 60
- 2023Evaluating and Improving Tool-Augmented Computation-Intensive Math Reasoningcited by 49
- 2022A Survey of Robust Adversarial Training in Pattern Recognition: Fundamental, Theory, and Methodologiescited by 44
- 2025Improving LLM-as-a-Judge Inference with the Judgment Distributioncited by 37
- 2024Beyond correlation: The Impact of Human Uncertainty in Measuring the Effectiveness of Automatic Evaluation and LLM-as-a-Judgecited by 31
- 2024Aligning Crowd Feedback via Distributional Preference Reward Modelingcited by 28
- 2023Frequency Domain Adversarial Training for Robust Volumetric Medical Segmentationcited by 6
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 4.
4 papers.
- 2026Probabilistic Calibration Is a Trainable Capability in Language Modelscited by 2
- 2026From Uncertain Judgments to Calibrated Rankings: Conformal Elo Estimation for LLM Evaluationcited by 2
- 2026Order Matters: LVLMs as Judges for Temporal Reasoning in Image Sequencescited by 1
- 2026PACEShop: Evaluating Personalized, Actionable, Compositional, and Evidence-grounded Shopping Assistantscited by 0
- 2026PACEShop: Evaluating Personalized, Actionable, Compositional, and Evidence-grounded Shopping Assistants20 Aug 2026
- 2026Order Matters: LVLMs as Judges for Temporal Reasoning in Image Sequences11 Aug 2026
- 2026From Uncertain Judgments to Calibrated Rankings: Conformal Elo Estimation for LLM Evaluation11 Jun 2026
- 2026Probabilistic Calibration Is a Trainable Capability in Language Models12 May 2026
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2025Beyond the Surface: Enhancing LLM-as-a-Judge Alignment with Human via Internal Representations
- 2026DIAL: Position-Debiased LLM Judges with Adaptive Human Preference Calibration
- 2024Systematic Evaluation of LLM-as-a-Judge in LLM Alignment Tasks: Explainable Metrics and Diverse Prompt Templates
- 2026Post-hoc Alignment of LLM-judges to Human Judgment Distribution
- 2024Style Outweighs Substance: Failure Modes of LLM Judges in Alignment Benchmarking
- 2026Grading Scale Impact on LLM-as-a-Judge: Human-LLM Alignment Is Highest on 0-5 Grading Scale
- 2024Evaluating the Evaluator: Measuring LLMs' Adherence to Task Evaluation Instructions
- 2026Quantifying and Mitigating Self-Preference Bias of LLM Judges