Dependence-Aware Label Aggregation for LLM-as-a-Judge via Ising Models
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Large-scale AI evaluation increasingly relies on aggregating binary judgments from K annotators, including LLMs used as judges. Most classical methods, e.g., Dawid-Skene or (weighted) majority voting, assume annotators are conditionally independent given the true label Y∈0,1, an assumption often violated by LLM judges due to shared data, architectures, prompts, and failure modes. Ignoring such dependencies can yield miscalibrated posteriors and even confidently incorrect predictions. We study label aggregation through a hierarchy of dependence-aware models based on Ising graphical models and latent factors. For class-dependent Ising models, the Bayes log-odds is generally quadratic in votes; for class-independent couplings, it reduces to a linear weighted vote with correlation-adjusted parameters. We present finite-K examples showing that methods based on conditional independence can flip the Bayes label despite matching per-annotator marginals. We prove separation results demonstrating that these methods remain strictly suboptimal as the number of judges grows, incurring nonvanishing excess risk under latent factors. Finally, we evaluate the proposed method on three real-world datasets, demonstrating improved performance over the classical baselines.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 24 of its 45 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 29 Jan 2026.
Builds on
24 of 45 references.
References · 24
- 2023Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arenacited by 8,393
- 2023G-Eval: NLG Evaluation using GPT-4 with Better Human Alignmentcited by 2,205
- 2024A Survey on LLM-as-a-Judgecited by 1,384
- 2017Get To The Point: Summarization with Pointer-Generator Networkscited by 1,281
- 2025gpt-oss-120b & gpt-oss-20b Model Cardcited by 1,258
- 2015Teaching Machines to Read and Comprehendcited by 1,039
- 2024From Generation to Judgment: Opportunities and Challenges of LLM-as-a-judgecited by 480
- 2021Dealing with Disagreements: Looking Beyond the Majority Vote in Subjective Annotationscited by 306
- 2023Prediction-Powered Inferencecited by 214
- 2023PPI++: Efficient Prediction-Powered Inferencecited by 103
- 2024AutoEval Done Right: Using Synthetic Data for Model Evaluationcited by 53
- 2025Great Models Think Alike and this Undermines AI Oversightcited by 53
12 more
- 2025Correlated Errors in Large Language Modelscited by 42
- 2025We're Different, We're the Same: Creative Homogeneity Across LLMscited by 41
- 2025Beyond Majority Voting: LLM Aggregation by Leveraging Higher-Order Informationcited by 25
- 2025How to Correctly Report LLM-as-a-Judge Evaluationscited by 25
- 2015Unsupervised Ensemble Learning with Dependent Classifierscited by 19
- 2016Avoiding Imposters and Delinquents: Adversarial Crowdsourcing and Peer Predictioncited by 15
- 2016A Deep Learning Approach to Unsupervised Ensemble Learningcited by 12
- 2016Exact Exponent in Optimal Rates for Crowdsourcingcited by 10
- 2021The Wisdom of the Crowd and Higher-Order Beliefscited by 8
- 2026Efficient Inference for Noisy LLM-as-a-Judge Evaluationcited by 7
- 2016Sparse estimation in Ising Model via penalized Monte Carlo methodscited by 2
- 2023Crowdsourcing Utilizing Subgroup Structure of Latent Factor Modelingcited by 2
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.
1 paper.