Sign inGet started
Paper · arXiv

Post-hoc Alignment of LLM-judges to Human Judgment Distribution

The LLM-as-a-judge (LLMaJ) framework offers a cost-effective and reproducible solution for automatic evaluation. However, current evaluation practices typically compare LLMaJ judgments against aggregated ground-truth labels, overlooking the valuable information contained in Human Label Variation (HLV). Inspired by an increasing line of work that proposes to leverage HLV, we systematically study LLMaJ performance on predicting both a single, aggregated ground truth hard-label and unaggregated soft-labels that represent Human Judgment Distributions (HJD). Our results across five diverse datasets reveal that while LLMs achieve near human-level performance at hard-label prediction on most tas...

AuthorsSebastian Steindl, Nikos Voskarides, Alberto Gasparin et al.
Primary categorycs.CL
Published1 September 2026
Last updated at source1 September 2026
cs.CL
Embed this entry
<iframe src="https://silytics.si/embed/item/e672b6bc-a394-4de8-bcf3-be641308198a" 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 Information may be incomplete or out of date.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.