mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

AURA: Adaptive Uncertainty-aware Refinement for LLM-as-a-Judge Auditing

arXiv 2606.19714 ↗First posted 18 Jun 2026stat.ML cs.AI cs.LGcited by 1

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used as judges for open-ended generation, as large-scale human evaluation is often expensive and difficult to scale, yet their preferences remain imperfect proxies for human judgment. Existing auditing pipelines often assume that a reliable subset of examples or clean supervision signals are available beforehand, for example from human annotation, heuristic filtering, or the outputs of strong judges. In LLM evaluation, this assumption is fragile: the initial split may inherit judge bias, while human verification is typically too scarce to define stable groups at scale. We propose AURA, an adaptive uncertainty--aware refinement framework for auditing pairwise LLM--as--a--judge decisions under selected human verification. AURA iteratively learns a human-consistency signal, propagates reliable evidence, and prioritizes uncertain comparisons for human review. The key idea is to treat trust in a judge as a latent quantity that is progressively refined as evidence accumulates. We provide a compact formulation, a stable refinement procedure, and a comprehensive evaluation on both synthetic and real pairwise LLM-answer data.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 28 of its 44 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 18 Jun 2026.

Builds on

28 of 44 references.

References · 28

  1. 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,971
  2. 2023Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arenacited by 8,626
  3. 2023Direct Preference Optimization: Your Language Model is Secretly a Reward Modelcited by 8,065
  4. 2017On Calibration of Modern Neural Networkscited by 4,960
  5. 2024Qwen2.5 Technical Reportcited by 4,942
  6. 2017Deep reinforcement learning from human preferencescited by 3,912
  7. 2022Training a Helpful and Harmless Assistant with Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedbackcited by 3,720
  8. 2023Mistral 7Bcited by 3,164
  9. 2013Sinkhorn Distances: Lightspeed Computation of Optimal Transportation Distancescited by 2,316
  10. 2023G-Eval: NLG Evaluation using GPT-4 with Better Human Alignmentcited by 2,276
  11. 2024Chatbot Arena: An Open Platform for Evaluating LLMs by Human Preferencecited by 1,184
  12. 2023Large Language Models are not Fair Evaluatorscited by 1,085
16 more
  1. 2024Length-Controlled AlpacaEval: A Simple Way to Debias Automatic Evaluatorscited by 897
  2. 2017Selective Classification for Deep Neural Networkscited by 852
  3. 2018Computational Optimal Transportcited by 780
  4. 2023AlpacaFarm: A Simulation Framework for Methods that Learn from Human Feedbackcited by 748
  5. 2023Prometheus: Inducing Fine-grained Evaluation Capability in Language Modelscited by 575
  6. 2024RewardBench: Evaluating Reward Models for Language Modelingcited by 499
  7. 2023JudgeLM: Fine-tuned Large Language Models are Scalable Judgescited by 367
  8. 2024JudgeBench: A Benchmark for Evaluating LLM-based Judgescited by 318
  9. 2023PandaLM: An Automatic Evaluation Benchmark for LLM Instruction Tuning Optimizationcited by 316
  10. 2023Evaluating Large Language Models at Evaluating Instruction Followingcited by 302
  11. 2017Positive-Unlabeled Learning with Non-Negative Risk Estimatorcited by 219
  12. 2018Learning from positive and unlabeled data: a surveycited by 219
  13. 2024Judging the Judges: Evaluating Alignment and Vulnerabilities in LLMs-as-Judgescited by 205
  14. 2024OffsetBias: Leveraging Debiased Data for Tuning Evaluatorscited by 94
  15. 2020Confidence Scores Make Instance-dependent Label-noise Learning Possiblecited by 63
  16. 2022Instance-Dependent Label-Noise Learning with Manifold-Regularized Transition Matrix Estimationcited by 49

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.

1 paper.