mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Beyond Pointwise Scores: Decomposed Criteria-Based Evaluation of LLM Responses

arXiv 2509.16093 ↗First posted 19 Sep 2025cs.CL cs.AIcited by 8

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Evaluating long-form answers in high-stakes domains such as law or medicine remains a fundamental challenge. Standard metrics like BLEU and ROUGE fail to capture semantic correctness, and current LLM-based evaluators often reduce nuanced aspects of answer quality into a single undifferentiated score. We introduce DeCE, a decomposed LLM evaluation framework that separates precision (factual accuracy and relevance) and recall (coverage of required concepts), using instance-specific criteria automatically extracted from gold answer requirements. DeCE is model-agnostic and domain-general, requiring no predefined taxonomies or handcrafted rubrics. We instantiate DeCE to evaluate different LLMs on a real-world legal QA task involving multi-jurisdictional reasoning and citation grounding. DeCE achieves substantially stronger correlation with expert judgments (r=0.78), compared to traditional metrics (r=0.12), pointwise LLM scoring (r=0.35), and modern multidimensional evaluators (r=0.48). It also reveals interpretable trade-offs: generalist models favor recall, while specialized models favor precision. Importantly, only 11.95% of LLM-generated criteria required expert revision, underscoring DeCE's scalability. DeCE offers an interpretable and actionable LLM evaluation framework in expert domains.

Key facts. Cited by 8 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 10 of its 30 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 19 Sep 2025.

Builds on

10 of 30 references.

References · 10

  1. 2020Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Knowledge-Intensive NLP Taskscited by 9,297
  2. 2023Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arenacited by 8,626
  3. 2023Direct Preference Optimization: Your Language Model is Secretly a Reward Modelcited by 8,065
  4. 2025Gemini 2.5: Pushing the Frontier with Advanced Reasoning, Multimodality, Long Context, and Next Generation Agentic Capabilitiescited by 3,796
  5. 2023G-Eval: NLG Evaluation using GPT-4 with Better Human Alignmentcited by 2,276
  6. 2024A Survey on LLM-as-a-Judgecited by 1,423
  7. 2023Enabling Large Language Models to Generate Text with Citationscited by 595
  8. 2024From Generation to Judgment: Opportunities and Challenges of LLM-as-a-judgecited by 494
  9. 2023Large Language Models in Law: A Surveycited by 128
  10. 2024Evaluation Ethics of LLMs in Legal Domaincited by 9

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 8.

8 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025LeMAJ (Legal LLM-as-a-Judge): Bridging Legal Reasoning and LLM Evaluation
  2. 2025Investigating the Shortcomings of LLMs in Step-by-Step Legal Reasoning
  3. 2025LegalEval-Q: A New Benchmark for The Quality Evaluation of LLM-Generated Legal Text
  4. 2026Evaluation of Large Language Models in Legal Applications: Challenges, Methods, and Future Directions
  5. 2026Can LLMs Reason in a Legally Meaningful Manner? A Small-scale Study on European Court of Human Rights Cases
  6. 2025Elevating Legal LLM Responses: Harnessing Trainable Logical Structures and Semantic Knowledge with Legal Reasoning
  7. 2026Multi-Legal-Bench: Evaluating LLMs on Legal Reasoning Across Jurisdictions, Languages, and Legal Traditions
  8. 2026SCORE: Specificity, Context Utilization, Robustness, and Relevance for Reference-Free LLM Evaluation