Sign inGet started
Paper · arXiv

JudgeProfile: Understanding and Steering Subjectivity in LLM Judges

LLM judges are inherently subjective, often favoring different responses in pairwise comparison when neither option is objectively wrong. To study this subjectivity, we introduce JudgeProfile, a framework that dissects LLM evaluation into perception (how a judge compares two responses across specific attributes like clarity, correctness, and detail) and prioritization (how much each attribute influences the final choice). We curate SubjectiveSet, a dataset of 50,013 response pairs from 17 public data sources, evaluated by 21 LLM judges across 87 attributes. We find a hidden consensus in perception: judges frequently agree on attribute judgments even when their overall choices diverge. Bui...

AuthorsQi Cao, Kangning Liu, Xuan Kan et al.
Primary categorycs.AI
Published29 September 2026
Last updated at source6 October 2026
cs.AI
Embed this entry
<iframe src="https://silytics.si/embed/item/dd7f58d4-d246-45c1-b853-3c18eccd0fd7" 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 Information may be incomplete or out of date.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.