Sign inGet started
Paper · arXiv

BACON: Budgeted Human Calibration for Modeling and Evaluation with Multiple AI Judges

AI judges offer a scalable, low-cost alternative to human evaluation, but their outputs can be biased relative to human preferences and highly item-dependent, varying across judges, tasks, and domains. When uncalibrated AI evaluations are used for model ranking, item scoring, or population-level quality reporting, these biases can directly distort downstream decisions. We propose BACON, a four-stage pipeline that combines budgeted human calibration with multiple AI-judge outputs to produce more accurate annotations. BACON constructs full-coverage auxiliary features for every item, including multi-judge scores, token-level uncertainty statistics, and contextual embeddings. It then collects...

AuthorsLei Shi, Anlan Zhang, Rita Lyu et al.
Primary categorycs.LG
Published26 June 2026
Last updated at source26 June 2026
cs.LGstat.AP
Embed this entry
<iframe src="https://silytics.si/embed/item/dc9c4a63-53d2-45b4-97d7-584cb6a0c5d3" width="420" height="190" style="border:0" loading="lazy" title="Silytics entry"></iframe>

Free, no tracking. More about feeds and embeds.

Silytics shows public metadata from arXiv and links to the original. Information may be incomplete or out of date. Last refreshed 17 October 2026. Licenses and terms of the original apply to the work itself. Not financial, legal or professional advice.