Automated Validation of LLM-based Evaluators for Software Engineering Artifacts
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Automation in software engineering increasingly relies on large language models (LLMs) to generate, review, and assess code artifacts. However, establishing LLMs as reliable evaluators remains an open challenge: human evaluations are costly, subjective and non scalable, while existing automated methods fail to discern fine grained variations in artifact quality. We introduce REFINE (Ranking Evaluators for FIne grained Nuanced Evaluation), an automated framework for benchmarking LLM based evaluators across software engineering tasks. REFINE comprises of two modules: Hierarchy Dataset Builder applies novel generation techniques to automatically synthesize artifacts with progressively reduced quality, and Evaluator Tester quantifies each candidate evaluator configuration by measuring how closely its rankings align with expected ordering. A key feature of REFINE is controllability: users can tune the granularity of degradation to progressively refine evaluator configurations, from coarse filtering to stress testing on subtle quality gaps. While the methodology is general, we focus on coding tasks reflecting the practical demands in our production setting. REFINE was integrated into IBM's internal development workflows and applied to code generation, translation, and summarization for COBOL, an enterprise critical programming language, using industrial data. It was used to identify LLM as a Judge configurations that lifted alignment scores from below 0.7 to above 0.9 in some coding tasks. These nuance sensitive evaluators are now actively used by model training teams to support model release decisions.
Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 9 of its 16 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 4 Aug 2025.
Builds on
9 of 16 references.
References · 9
- 2023Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arenacited by 8,626
- 2023Large Language Models are not Fair Evaluatorscited by 1,085
- 2024Humans or LLMs as the Judge? A Study on Judgement Biasescited by 323
- 2021What Will it Take to Fix Benchmarking in Natural Language Understanding?cited by 203
- 2022Validating Large Language Models with ReLMcited by 33
- 2024Finding Blind Spots in Evaluator LLMs with Interpretable Checklistscited by 32
- 2023METAL: Metamorphic Testing Framework for Analyzing Large-Language Model Qualitiescited by 20
- 2024Drowzee: Metamorphic Testing for Fact-Conflicting Hallucination Detection in Large Language Modelscited by 14
- 2024MORTAR: Multi-turn Metamorphic Testing for LLM-based Dialogue Systemscited by 7
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 3; 2026: 1.
4 papers.
- 2025LaajMeter: A Framework for LaaJ Evaluationcited by 1
- 2025EvoSyn: Generalizable Evolutionary Data Synthesis for Verifiable Learningcited by 1
- 2025Vintage Code, Modern Judges: Meta-Validation in Low Data Regimescited by 0
- 2026Is Vibe Coding the Future? An Empirical Assessment of LLM Generated Codes for Construction Safetycited by 0
- 2026Is Vibe Coding the Future? An Empirical Assessment of LLM Generated Codes for Construction Safety14 Apr 2026
- 2025Vintage Code, Modern Judges: Meta-Validation in Low Data Regimes31 Oct 2025
- 2025EvoSyn: Generalizable Evolutionary Data Synthesis for Verifiable Learning20 Oct 2025
- 2025LaajMeter: A Framework for LaaJ Evaluation13 Aug 2025