mlsanityData to 13 Oct 2026

Curiosity-Driven LLM-as-a-judge for Personalized Creative Judgment

arXiv 2510.05135 ↗First posted 1 Oct 2025cs.CL cs.LGcited by 1

On the map: LLM reasoning → Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation

Abstract (arXiv)

Modern large language models (LLMs) excel at objective tasks such as evaluating mathematical reasoning and factual accuracy, yet they falter when faced with the nuanced, subjective nature of assessing creativity. In this work, we propose a novel curiosity-driven LLM-as-a-judge for evaluating creative writing which is personlized to each individual's creative judgments. We use the Torrance Test of Creative Thinking(TTCW) benchmark introduced in Chakrabarty et al. (2024), which has stories annotated by expert humans across various subjective dimensions like Originality, to test our hypothesis. We show that our method enables models across various sizes, to learn the nuanced creative judgments of different individuals, by showing improvements over baseline supervised finetuning(SFT) method across various evaluation metrics like Pearson correlation, Cohen's and F1 values. Our method is especially useful in subjective evaluations where not all the annotators agree with each other.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 13 Oct 2026). Placed in Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning. Builds on 19 of its 32 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 1 Oct 2025.

Builds on

19 of 32 references.

References · 19

  1. 2022Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Modelscited by 12,376
  2. 2021Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problemscited by 9,916
  3. 2014ImageNet Large Scale Visual Recognition Challengecited by 8,476
  4. 2022Self-Consistency Improves Chain of Thought Reasoning in Language Modelscited by 5,657
  5. 2018GLUE: A Multi-Task Benchmark and Analysis Platform for Natural Language Understandingcited by 4,880
  6. 2023Qwen Technical Reportcited by 3,310
  7. 2017Curiosity-driven Exploration by Self-supervised Predictioncited by 1,180
  8. 2018Exploration by Random Network Distillationcited by 971
  9. 2024LLM Evaluators Recognize and Favor Their Own Generationscited by 664
  10. 2016Unifying Count-Based Exploration and Intrinsic Motivationcited by 632
  11. 2021Dealing with Disagreements: Looking Beyond the Majority Vote in Subjective Annotationscited by 308
  12. 2024Self-Preference Bias in LLM-as-a-Judgecited by 253
7 more
  1. 2023Art or Artifice? Large Language Models and the False Promise of Creativitycited by 168
  2. 2024Robust Preference Optimization through Reward Model Distillationcited by 67
  3. 2024Assessing and Understanding Creativity in Large Language Modelscited by 35
  4. 2025Enhancing Personalized Multi-Turn Dialogue with Curiosity Rewardcited by 25
  5. 2020Exploration Based Language Learning for Text-Based Gamescited by 18
  6. 2025Distill Not Only Data but Also Rewards: Can Smaller Language Models Surpass Larger Ones?cited by 12
  7. 2024Simultaneous Reward Distillation and Preference Learning: Get You a Language Model Who Can Do Bothcited by 5

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 13 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.

1 paper.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025CreativityPrism: A Cross-Domain Evaluation Framework for Large Language Model Creativity
  2. 2025LitBench: A Benchmark and Dataset for Reliable Evaluation of Creative Writing
  3. 2025A Causality-aware Paradigm for Evaluating Creativity of Multimodal Large Language Models
  4. 2025Creative Preference Optimization
  5. 2026CLIN: an Objective Framework for Evaluating Creativity in Short Persian Literary Text
  6. 2026How LLMs See Creativity: Zero-Shot Scoring of Visual Creativity with Interpretable Reasoning
  7. 2025CLAWS:Creativity detection for LLM-generated solutions using Attention Window of Sections
  8. 2025Rethinking Creativity Evaluation: A Critical Analysis of Existing Creativity Evaluations