Efficient LLM Comparative Assessment: A Product of Experts Framework for Pairwise Comparisons
Adian Liusie, Vatsal Raina, Yassir Fathullah, Mark J. F. Gales
Abstract
LLM-as-a-judge approaches are a practical and effective way of assessing a range of text tasks. However, when using pairwise comparisons to rank a set of candidates, the computational cost scales quadratically with the number of candidates, which has practical limitations. This paper introduces a Product of Expert (PoE) framework for efficient LLM Comparative Assessment. Here individual comparisons are considered experts that provide information on a pair’s score difference. The PoE framework combines the information from these experts to yield an expression that can be maximized with respect to the underlying set of candidates, and is highly flexible where any form of expert can be assumed. When Gaussian experts are used one can derive simple closed-form solutions for the optimal candidate ranking, as well as expressions for selecting which comparisons should be made to maximize the probability of this ranking. Our approach enables efficient comparative assessment, where by using only a small subset of the possible comparisons, one can generate score predictions that correlate well with human judgements. We evaluate the approach on multiple NLG tasks and demonstrate that our framework can yield considerable computational savings when performing pairwise comparative assessment. With many candidate texts, using as few as 2% of comparisons the PoE solution can achieve similar performance to when all comparisons are used.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Cited by top-tier papers10
- Who can we trust? LLM-as-a-jury for Comparative AssessmentMengjie Qian, Guangzhi Sun, Mark Gales, Kate KnillICML 2026 · 5 citations
- LCES: Zero-shot Automated Essay Scoring via Pairwise Comparisons Using Large Language ModelsTakumi Shibata, Yuichi MiyamuraEMNLP 2025 · 3 citations
- Designing Staged Evaluation Workflows for LLMs: Integrating Domain Experts, Lay Users, and Model-Generated Evaluation CriteriaAnnalisa Szymanski, Simret Araya Gebreegziabher, Oghenemaro Anuyah, Ronald A. Metoyer et al.CHI 2026 · 1 citation
- SkillVerse : Assessing and Enhancing LLMs with Tree EvaluationYufei Tian, Jiao Sun, Nanyun Peng, Zizhao ZhangACL 2025 · 1 citation
- ExPairT-LLM: Exact Learning for LLM Code Selection by Pairwise QueriesTom Yuviler, Dana Drachsler-CohenAAAI 2026
Builds on9
- BERTScore: Evaluating Text Generation with BERTTianyi Zhang, Varsha Kishore, Felix Wu, Kilian Q. Weinberger et al.ICLR 2020 · 8,443 citations
- Finetuned Language Models are Zero-Shot LearnersJason Wei, Maarten Bosma, Vincent Y. Zhao, Kelvin Guu et al.ICLR 2022 · 4,966 citations
- BARTScore: Evaluating Generated Text as Text GenerationWeizhe Yuan, Graham Neubig, Pengfei LiuNeurIPS 2021 · 1,143 citations
- G-Eval: NLG Evaluation using Gpt-4 with Better Human AlignmentYang Liu, Dan Iter, Yichong Xu, Shuohang Wang et al.EMNLP 2023 · 549 citations
- Asking and Answering Questions to Evaluate the Factual Consistency of SummariesAlex Wang, Kyunghyun Cho, Mike LewisACL 2020 · 317 citations
Related papers
- Active Evaluation: Efficient NLG Evaluation with Few Pairwise ComparisonsAkash Kumar Mohankumar, Mitesh M. KhapraACL 2022 · 8 citations
- A Judge-Aware Ranking Framework for Evaluating Large Language Models without Ground TruthMingyuan Xu, Xinzi Tan, Jiawei Wu, Doudou ZhouICML 2026
- Multi-Agent-as-Judge: Aligning LLM-Agent-Based Automated Evaluation with Multi-Dimensional Human EvaluationJiaju Chen, Yuxuan Lu, Xiaojie Wang, Huimin Zeng et al.ACL 2026 · 30 citations
- Auto-PRE: An Automatic and Cost-Efficient Peer-Review Framework for Language Generation EvaluationJunjie Chen, Weihang Su, Zhumin Chu, Haitao Li et al.AAAI 2026
- Bridging Human and LLM Judgments: Understanding and Narrowing the GapFelipe Maia Polo, Xinhe Wang, Mikhail Yurochkin, Gongjun Xu et al.NeurIPS 2025 · 7 citations
