# IF-RewardBench: Benchmarking Judge Models for Instruction-Following Evaluation

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2603.04738 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2603.04738/

## Key facts

- Cited by 10 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 33 of its 53 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 5 Mar 2026.

## Builds on (most cited first, 30 of 33)

- [Training language models to follow instructions with human feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.02155/) (2022)
- [Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arena](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.05685/) (2023)
- [Efficient Memory Management for Large Language Model Serving with PagedAttention](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.06180/) (2023)
- [ChatGLM: A Family of Large Language Models from GLM-130B to GLM-4 All Tools](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.12793/) (2024)
- [Large Language Monkeys: Scaling Inference Compute with Repeated Sampling](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.21787/) (2024)
- [GLM-4.5: Agentic, Reasoning, and Coding (ARC) Foundation Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2508.06471/) (2025)
- [Trustworthy LLMs: a Survey and Guideline for Evaluating Large Language Models' Alignment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.05374/) (2023)
- [JudgeBench: A Benchmark for Evaluating LLM-based Judges](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.12784/) (2024)
- [Evaluating Large Language Models at Evaluating Instruction Following](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.07641/) (2023)
- [Skywork-Reward-V2: Scaling Preference Data Curation via Human-AI Synergy](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.01352/) (2025)
- [Generalizing Verifiable Instruction Following](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.02833/) (2025)
- [MultiChallenge: A Realistic Multi-Turn Conversation Evaluation Benchmark Challenging to Frontier LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.17399/) (2025)
- [Benchmarking Complex Instruction-Following with Multiple Constraints Composition](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.03978/) (2024)
- [RewardBench 2: Advancing Reward Model Evaluation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.01937/) (2025)
- [InFoBench: Evaluating Instruction Following Ability in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.03601/) (2024)
- [AgentRewardBench: Evaluating Automatic Evaluations of Web Agent Trajectories](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.08942/) (2025)
- [PRMBench: A Fine-grained and Challenging Benchmark for Process-Level Reward Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.03124/) (2025)
- [A Survey of Safety and Trustworthiness of Large Language Models through the Lens of Verification and Validation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.11391/) (2023)
- [How to Evaluate Reward Models for RLHF](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.14872/) (2024)
- [CFBench: A Comprehensive Constraints-Following Benchmark for LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2408.01122/) (2024)
- [IHEval: Evaluating Language Models on Following the Instruction Hierarchy](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.08745/) (2025)
- [Agentic Reward Modeling: Integrating Human Preferences with Verifiable Correctness Signals for Reliable Reward Systems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.19328/) (2025)
- [AGENTIF: Benchmarking Instruction Following of Large Language Models in Agentic Scenarios](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.16944/) (2025)
- [VerIF: Verification Engineering for Reinforcement Learning in Instruction Following](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.09942/) (2025)
- [M-Prometheus: A Suite of Open Multilingual LLM Judges](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.04953/) (2025)
- [LMUnit: Fine-grained Evaluation with Natural Language Unit Tests](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.13091/) (2024)
- [IOPO: Empowering LLMs with Complex Instruction Following via Input-Output Preference Optimization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2411.06208/) (2024)
- [StructFlowBench: A Structured Flow Benchmark for Multi-turn Instruction Following](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.14494/) (2025)
- [Agent-RewardBench: Towards a Unified Benchmark for Reward Modeling across Perception, Planning, and Safety in Real-World Multimodal Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.21252/) (2025)
- [RoleMRC: A Fine-Grained Composite Benchmark for Role-Playing and Instruction-Following](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.11387/) (2025)

## Built on by (most cited first, 10 of 10)

- [When LLM Judge Scores Look Good but Best-of-N Decisions Fail](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2603.12520/) (2026)
- [Skill-RM: Unifying Heterogeneous Evaluation Criteria via Agent Skill](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.03980/) (2026)
- [LLM-as-a-Judge Scores Are Unreliable Optimization Signals in Closed-Loop Table Recognition](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2607.13347/) (2026)
- [Small Language Models as Judges for Rubric-Based Reinforcement Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2608.30005/) (2026)
- [SEIF: Self-Evolving Reinforcement Learning for Instruction Following](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.07465/) (2026)
- [Mitigating Exploration Bias in RL for Multi-Instruction Following](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2608.23830/) (2026)
- [ScopeIF: Improving Scope-Aware Precise Instruction-Following in Large Language Models via Graded Reward Modeling](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.32189/) (2026)
- [PADMÉ: Preference Alignment Data Synthesis for Meta-Evaluation of LM Agent Evaluators](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.36086/) (2026)
- [JudgeProfile: Understanding and Steering Subjectivity in LLM Judges](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.36705/) (2026)
- [LegalRewardBench: Benchmarking Reward Models for Legal Preference Evaluation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2610.18299/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Instruction-following is a foundational capability of large language models (LLMs), with its improvement hinging on scalable and accurate feedback from judge models. However, the reliability of current judge models in instruction-following remains underexplored due to several deficiencies of existing meta-evaluation benchmarks, such as their insufficient data coverage and oversimplified pairwise evaluation paradigms that misalign with model optimization scenarios. To this end, we propose IF-RewardBench, a comprehensive meta-evaluation benchmark for instruction-following that covers diverse instruction and constraint types. For each instruction, we construct a preference graph containing all pairwise preferences among multiple responses based on instruction-following quality. This design enables a listwise evaluation paradigm that assesses the capabilities of judge models to rank multiple responses, which is essential in guiding model alignment. Extensive experiments on IF-RewardBench reveal significant deficiencies in current judge models and demonstrate that our benchmark achieves a stronger positive correlation with downstream task performance compared to existing benchmarks. Our codes and data are available at https://github.com/thu-coai/IF-RewardBench.