mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Surprise-Guided MergeSort: Budget-Efficient Human-in-the-Loop Ranking via Adaptive Comparison Scheduling

arXiv 2606.15623 ↗First posted 14 Jun 2026cs.LG cs.AIcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Pairwise comparison is the gold standard for subjective ranking tasks; however, exhaustive annotation requires a massive number of human comparisons (O(n2)). While sorting-based methods have reduced this burden to O(nlog n), they still require expensive human judgment for every single comparison. To further improve annotation efficiency, we propose leveraging a Vision-Language Model (VLM) not as an annotator replacement, but as a question prioritizer to identify which comparisons genuinely require human judgment. The proposed Surprise-Guided MergeSort (SGS) framework achieves this through three integrated components: (1) a bottom-up MergeSort scheduler that structures comparisons and exploits transitivity, (2) a composite Surprise Scorer -- combining position-bias-cancelled VLM confidence, Elo gap, and vote entropy -- to quantify comparison ambiguity, and (3) an adaptive budget allocator that routes high-surprise pairs to humans while automating low-surprise pairs via transitivity inference. Validation was conducted on six diverse benchmarks spanning text similarity (STS-B, BIOSSES, SICKR-STS) and image quality assessment (KonIQ-10k, TID2013, LIVE Challenge). SGS effectively identified and skipped up to 535 non-informative comparisons per session. Consequently, it achieved Kendall's τ×100 improvements of +6 to +12 over Active Elo under the same total budget. These results demonstrate that combining VLM-guided surprise metrics with algorithmic sorting provides a generally consistent accuracy-efficiency trade-off across diverse domains.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 13 of its 25 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 14 Jun 2026.

Builds on

13 of 25 references.

References · 13

  1. 2021Learning Transferable Visual Models From Natural Language Supervisioncited by 33,744
  2. 2023Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arenacited by 8,626
  3. 2023Large Language Models are not Fair Evaluatorscited by 1,085
  4. 2017SemEval-2017 Task 1: Semantic Textual Similarity - Multilingual and Cross-lingual Focused Evaluationcited by 1,001
  5. 2022MTEB: Massive Text Embedding Benchmarkcited by 640
  6. 2019KonIQ-10k: An ecologically valid database for deep learning of blind image quality assessmentcited by 355
  7. 2023Large Language Models are Effective Text Rankers with Pairwise Ranking Promptingcited by 307
  8. 2015Massive Online Crowdsourced Study of Subjective and Objective Picture Qualitycited by 209
  9. 2024Active Preference Learning for Ordering Items In- and Out-of-samplecited by 6
  10. 2022Decreasing Annotation Burden of Pairwise Comparisons with Human-in-the-Loop Sorting: Application in Medical Image Artifact Ratingcited by 5
  11. 2025EZ-Sort: Efficient Pairwise Comparison via Zero-Shot CLIP-Based Pre-Ordering and Human-in-the-Loop Sortingcited by 3
  12. 2026Dodgersort: Uncertainty-Aware VLM-Guided Human-in-the-Loop Pairwise Rankingcited by 1
1 more
  1. 2026MetaRanker: Human-in-the-loop Active Ranking for Metalens Image Qualitycited by 1

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2024RankPrompt: Step-by-Step Comparisons Make Language Models Better Reasoners
  2. 2025Are Optimal Algorithms Still Optimal? Rethinking Sorting in LLM-Based Pairwise Ranking with Batching and Caching
  3. 2026A Judge-Aware Ranking Framework for Evaluating Large Language Models without Ground Truth
  4. 2025RankArena: A Unified Platform for Evaluating Retrieval, Reranking and RAG with Human and LLM Feedback
  5. 2026PRECISE: Reducing the Bias of LLM Evaluations Using Prediction-Powered Ranking Estimation
  6. 2023DecipherPref: Analyzing Influential Factors in Human Preference Judgments via GPT-4
  7. 2024HumanRankEval: Automatic Evaluation of LMs as Conversational Assistants
  8. 2025Rank1: Test-Time Compute for Reranking in Information Retrieval