Multi-Dimensional Evaluation of Sustainable City Trips with LLM-as-a-Judge and Human-in-the-Loop
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Evaluating nuanced conversational travel recommendations is challenging when human annotations are costly and standard metrics ignore stakeholder-centric goals. We study LLMs-as-Judges for sustainable city-trip lists across four dimensions -- relevance, diversity, sustainability, and popularity balance, and propose a three-phase calibration framework: (1) baseline judging with multiple LLMs, (2) expert evaluation to identify systematic misalignment, and (3) dimension-specific calibration via rules and few-shot examples. Across two recommendation settings, we observe model-specific biases and high dimension-level variance, even when judges agree on overall rankings. Calibration clarifies reasoning per dimension but exposes divergent interpretations of sustainability, highlighting the need for transparent, bias-aware LLM evaluation. Prompts and code are released for reproducibility: https://github.com/ashmibanerjee/trs-llm-calibration.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 5 of its 9 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 27 Apr 2026.
Builds on
5 of 9 references.
References · 5
- 2024A Survey on LLM-as-a-Judgecited by 1,423
- 2024Judging the Judges: Evaluating Alignment and Vulnerabilities in LLMs-as-Judgescited by 205
- 2025SynthTRIPs: A Knowledge-Grounded Framework for Benchmark Query Generation for Personalized Tourism Recommenderscited by 8
- 2023Towards Individual and Multistakeholder Fairness in Tourism Recommender Systemscited by 5
- 2019Beyond Personalization: Research Directions in Multistakeholder Recommendationcited by 4
Built on by
Not cited yet.