# Reference-Free Rating of LLM Responses via Latent Information

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2509.24678 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.24678/

## Key facts

- Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 82 of its 92 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 29 Sep 2025.

## Builds on (most cited first, 30 of 82)

- [BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understanding](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1810.04805/) (2018)
- [Training language models to follow instructions with human feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.02155/) (2022)
- [Proximal Policy Optimization Algorithms](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1707.06347/) (2017)
- [The Llama 3 Herd of Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.21783/) (2024)
- [Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2110.14168/) (2021)
- [Qwen3 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.09388/) (2025)
- [Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arena](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.05685/) (2023)
- [Direct Preference Optimization: Your Language Model is Secretly a Reward Model](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.18290/) (2023)
- [On Calibration of Modern Neural Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1706.04599/) (2017)
- [Deep reinforcement learning from human preferences](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1706.03741/) (2017)
- [Let's Verify Step by Step](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.20050/) (2023)
- [Training a Helpful and Harmless Assistant with Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2204.05862/) (2022)
- [The Curious Case of Neural Text Degeneration](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1904.09751/) (2019)
- [Learning to summarize from human feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2009.01325/) (2020)
- [Deep contextualized word representations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1802.05365/) (2018)
- [G-Eval: NLG Evaluation using GPT-4 with Better Human Alignment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.16634/) (2023)
- [Qwen2 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.10671/) (2024)
- [gpt-oss-120b & gpt-oss-20b Model Card](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2508.10925/) (2025)
- [Understanding intermediate layers using linear classifier probes](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1610.01644/) (2016)
- [Representation Engineering: A Top-Down Approach to AI Transparency](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.01405/) (2023)
- [ChatGLM: A Family of Large Language Models from GLM-130B to GLM-4 All Tools](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.12793/) (2024)
- [Steering Llama 2 via Contrastive Activation Addition](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2312.06681/) (2023)
- [A General Language Assistant as a Laboratory for Alignment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2112.00861/) (2021)
- [Tulu 3: Pushing Frontiers in Open Language Model Post-Training](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2411.15124/) (2024)
- [Math-Shepherd: Verify and Reinforce LLMs Step-by-step without Human Annotations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2312.08935/) (2023)
- [Steering Language Models With Activation Engineering](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.10248/) (2023)
- [Solving math word problems with process- and outcome-based feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2211.14275/) (2022)
- [Enhancing Chat Language Models by Scaling High-quality Instructional Conversations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.14233/) (2023)
- [The Geometry of Truth: Emergent Linear Structure in Large Language Model Representations of True/False Datasets](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.06824/) (2023)
- [Phi-4 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.08905/) (2024)

## Built on by (most cited first, 4 of 4)

- [Atomic Information Flow: A Network Flow Model for Tool Attributions in RAG Systems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.04912/) (2026)
- [Judge Circuits Explain Format-Induced Inconsistency in LLM-as-a-Judge](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.16023/) (2026)
- [Opening LLM Judges: Recovering Preference Signals Beyond the Final Verdict](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.32407/) (2026)
- [Intelligence Is Not the Bottleneck: Validating an LLM First-Pass Manuscript Score Against Peer-Review Outcomes](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.15887/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

How reliable are single-response LLM-as-a-judge ratings without references, and can we obtain fine-grained, deterministic scores in this setting? We study the common practice of asking a judge model to assign Likert-scale scores to free-text responses and show two systematic issues: scores are unstable under sampling and poorly calibrated, leading to compression near the top of the scale and frequent ties. We then propose and evaluate Latent Judges, which derive scalar ratings from internal model signals: (i) probability-weighted scores over integer ratings, (ii) verifier-style probabilities of "yes", and (iii) linear probes trained on model activations at the rating position. Across a broad suite of pairwise and single-rating benchmarks, latent methods match or surpass standard prompting, with consistent gains on pairwise accuracy and listwise ranking relevant to Best-of-N selection. Probability-weighted scores achieve the strongest single-rating correlations, while probes recover useful signals when output logits are miscalibrated. These results indicate that latent information provides deterministic and more discriminative signals for reference-free evaluation, and can improve selection and training approaches like Best-of-N, multi-teacher distillation, and routing.
