mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Any Large Language Model Can Be a Reliable Judge: Debiasing with a Reasoning-based Bias Detector

arXiv 2505.17100 ↗First posted 21 May 2025cs.CLcited by 14

On the map: LLM reasoning → Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation

Abstract (arXiv)

LLM-as-a-Judge has emerged as a promising tool for automatically evaluating generated outputs, but its reliability is often undermined by potential biases in judgment. Existing efforts to mitigate these biases face key limitations: in-context learning-based methods fail to address rooted biases due to the evaluator's limited capacity for self-reflection, whereas fine-tuning is not applicable to all evaluator types, especially closed-source models. To address this challenge, we introduce the Reasoning-based Bias Detector (RBD), which is a plug-in module that identifies biased evaluations and generates structured reasoning to guide evaluator self-correction. Rather than modifying the evaluator itself, RBD operates externally and engages in an iterative process of bias detection and feedback-driven revision. To support its development, we design a complete pipeline consisting of biased dataset construction, supervision collection, distilled reasoning-based fine-tuning of RBD, and integration with LLM evaluators. We fine-tune four sizes of RBD models, ranging from 1.5B to 14B, and observe consistent performance improvements across all scales. Experimental results on 4 bias types--verbosity, position, bandwagon, and sentiment--evaluated using 8 LLM evaluators demonstrate RBD's strong effectiveness. For example, the RBD-8B model improves evaluation accuracy by an average of 18.5% and consistency by 10.9%, and surpasses prompting-based baselines and fine-tuned judges by 12.8% and 17.2%, respectively. These results highlight RBD's effectiveness and scalability. Additional experiments further demonstrate its strong generalization across biases and domains, as well as its efficiency.

Key facts. Cited by 14 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning. Builds on 3 of its 59 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 21 May 2025.

Builds on

3 of 59 references.

References · 3

  1. 2021Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problemscited by 10,109
  2. 2023Generative Judge for Evaluating Alignmentcited by 169
  3. 2024A Better LLM Evaluator for Text Generation: The Impact of Prompt Output Sequencing and Optimizationcited by 11

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 1; 2026: 13.

14 papers.

Sort:

By area:

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025BiasGuard: A Reasoning-enhanced Bias Detection Tool For Large Language Models
  2. 2026Biases in the Blind Spot: Detecting What LLMs Fail to Mention
  3. 2025Reasoning Towards Fairness: Mitigating Bias in Language Models through Reasoning-Guided Fine-Tuning
  4. 2025Does Reasoning Introduce Bias? A Study of Social Bias Evaluation and Mitigation in LLM Reasoning
  5. 2024Towards Resource Efficient and Interpretable Bias Mitigation in Large Language Models
  6. 2025BiasFilter: An Inference-Time Debiasing Framework for Large Language Models
  7. 2025Assessing Judging Bias in Large Reasoning Models: An Empirical Study
  8. 2026Self-Debias: Self-correcting for Debiasing Large Language Models