# Rating Roulette: Self-Inconsistency in LLM-As-A-Judge Frameworks

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.27106 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.27106/

## Key facts

- Cited by 38 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 29 of its 53 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 31 Oct 2025.

## Builds on (most cited first, 29 of 29)

- [Language Models are Few-Shot Learners](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.14165/) (2020)
- [Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arena](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.05685/) (2023)
- [Self-Consistency Improves Chain of Thought Reasoning in Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.11171/) (2022)
- [BERTScore: Evaluating Text Generation with BERT](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1904.09675/) (2019)
- [G-Eval: NLG Evaluation using GPT-4 with Better Human Alignment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.16634/) (2023)
- [A Survey on LLM-as-a-Judge](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2411.15594/) (2024)
- [BLEURT: Learning Robust Metrics for Text Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2004.04696/) (2020)
- [Hierarchical Neural Story Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1805.04833/) (2018)
- [Chatbot Arena: An Open Platform for Evaluating LLMs by Human Preference](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.04132/) (2024)
- [Can Large Language Models Be an Alternative to Human Evaluations?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.01937/) (2023)
- [SummEval: Re-evaluating Summarization Evaluation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2007.12626/) (2020)
- [Evaluating the Factual Consistency of Abstractive Text Summarization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1910.12840/) (2019)
- [From Generation to Judgment: Opportunities and Challenges of LLM-as-a-judge](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2411.16594/) (2024)
- [LLMs-as-Judges: A Comprehensive Survey on LLM-based Evaluation Methods](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.05579/) (2024)
- [SummaC: Re-Visiting NLI-based Models for Inconsistency Detection in Summarization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2111.09525/) (2021)
- [Replacing Judges with Juries: Evaluating LLM Generations with a Panel of Diverse Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.18796/) (2024)
- [JudgeBench: A Benchmark for Evaluating LLM-based Judges](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.12784/) (2024)
- [State of What Art? A Call for Multi-Prompt LLM Evaluation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.00595/) (2023)
- [Understanding Factuality in Abstractive Summarization with FRANK: A Benchmark for Factuality Metrics](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2104.13346/) (2021)
- [Evaluation of Text Generation: A Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2006.14799/) (2020)
- [LLMs instead of Human Judges? A Large Scale Empirical Study across 20 NLP Evaluation Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.18403/) (2024)
- [Judging the Judges: Evaluating Alignment and Vulnerabilities in LLMs-as-Judges](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.12624/) (2024)
- [An Empirical Study of LLM-as-a-Judge for LLM Evaluation: Fine-tuned Judge Model is not a General Substitute for GPT-4](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.02839/) (2024)
- [JudgeLRM: Large Reasoning Models as a Judge](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.00050/) (2025)
- [What Have We Achieved on Text Summarization?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2010.04529/) (2020)
- [Evaluating Evaluation Metrics: A Framework for Analyzing NLG Evaluation Metrics using Measurement Theory](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.14889/) (2023)
- [From Medprompt to o1: Exploration of Run-Time Strategies for Medical Challenge Problems and Beyond](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2411.03590/) (2024)
- [Consistency is Key: Disentangling Label Variation in Natural Language Processing with Intra-Annotator Agreement](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2301.10684/) (2023)
- [Black-box Uncertainty Quantification Method for LLM-as-a-Judge](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.11594/) (2024)

## Built on by (most cited first, 30 of 38)

- [Rethinking Rubric Generation for Improving LLM Judge and Reward Modeling for Open-ended Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.05125/) (2026)
- [Reliability without Validity: A Systematic, Large-Scale Evaluation of LLM-as-a-Judge Models Across Agreement, Consistency, and Bias](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.19544/) (2026)
- [CDRRM: Contrast-Driven Rubric Generation for Reliable and Interpretable Reward Modeling](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2603.08035/) (2026)
- [FinToolBench: Evaluating LLM Agents for Real-World Financial Tool Use](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2603.08262/) (2026)
- [Hidden Measurement Error in LLM Pipelines Distorts Annotation, Evaluation, and Benchmarking](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2604.11581/) (2026)
- [From Words to Widgets for Controllable LLM Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2604.10925/) (2026)
- [Pessimistic Verification for Open Ended Math Questions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2511.21522/) (2025)
- [Label Effects: Shared Heuristic Reliance in Trust Assessment by Humans and LLM-as-a-Judge](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2604.05593/) (2026)
- [SIR-Bench: Evaluating Investigation Depth in Security Incident Response Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2604.12040/) (2026)
- [LLM-as-a-Judge Scores Are Unreliable Optimization Signals in Closed-Loop Table Recognition](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2607.13347/) (2026)
- [MTVA-Bench: Evaluating the Language Model Inside Cascaded Voice Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.20152/) (2026)
- [Overtrained, Not Misaligned](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.12199/) (2026)
- [When Languages Disagree: Self-Evolving Multilingual LLM Judges](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.08092/) (2026)
- [Improving Cross-Format Robustness in Language Models with Multi-Format Training](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.11643/) (2026)
- [Interrupting the Loop: Periodic Subject Changes Raise Judged Surprise and Connection in Base Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2608.19893/) (2026)
- [Evaluative Fingerprints: Stable and Systematic Differences in LLM Evaluator Behavior](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.05114/) (2026)
- [The Stability Trap: Evaluating the Reliability of LLM-Based Instruction Adherence Auditing](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.11783/) (2026)
- [Validating Political Position Predictions of Arguments](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.18351/) (2026)
- [SEAR: Schema-Based Evaluation and Routing for LLM Gateways](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2603.26728/) (2026)
- [Large Language Model Selection with Limited Annotations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.24981/) (2026)
- [LLM Judges Inconsistently Disagree Across Safety Criteria and Harm Categories](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.31381/) (2026)
- [CAFE: A Compound-AI Factorial Evaluation Framework](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2607.10380/) (2026)
- [Suffix-Constrained Greedy Search Algorithms for Causal Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2603.01243/) (2026)
- [PAC-CF: Calibrating Irreversible Frontier Pruning in LLM-Guided Search](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2604.14345/) (2026)
- [Naturalistic measure of social norms alignment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.23420/) (2026)
- [Multi-Stakeholder LLM Alignment: Decomposing Estimation from Aggregation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.26878/) (2026)
- [FraudSMSWalker: Benchmarking Agentic Large Language Models for SMS-to-Webpage Fraud Detection](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.16659/) (2026)
- [Towards Spec Learning: Inference-Time Alignment from Preference Pairs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.24004/) (2026)
- [The Consistency Dilemma in LLMs: Generator-Evaluator Agreement and Vulnerability to Mistakes](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.30653/) (2026)
- [Project Kaleidoscope: Contextual, Human-Aligned Evaluation for Real-World AI Applications](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2607.14673/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

As Natural Language Generation (NLG) continues to be widely adopted, properly assessing it has become quite difficult. Lately, using large language models (LLMs) for evaluating these generations has gained traction, as they tend to align more closely with human preferences than conventional n-gram or embedding-based metrics. In our experiments, we show that LLM judges have low intra-rater reliability in their assigned scores across different runs. This variance makes their ratings inconsistent, almost arbitrary in the worst case, making it difficult to measure how good their judgments actually are. We quantify this inconsistency across different NLG tasks and benchmarks and see if judicious use of LLM judges can still be useful following proper guidelines.