Doubly-Robust LLM-as-a-Judge: Externally Valid Estimation with Imperfect Personas
Luke Guerdan, Justin Whitehouse, Kimberly Truong, Ken Holstein, Steven Wu
Abstract
As Generative AI (GenAI) systems see growing adoption, a key concern involves the external validity of evaluations, or the extent to which they generalize from lab-based to real-world deployment conditions. Threats to the external validity of GenAI evaluations arise when the source sample of human raters and system outputs used to obtain a system quality estimate differs from the target distribution at deployment time. In this work, we propose a doubly-robust estimation framework designed to address this evaluation sampling bias. Key to our approach is the use of synthetic "persona" ratings -- produced by prompting an LLM evaluator (i.e., an LLM-as-a-judge) to behave as a human rater with specific sociodemographic characteristics. Our doubly-robust framework combines these informative yet imperfect persona ratings with human ratings obtained under evaluation sampling bias to produce statistically valid system quality estimates. In particular, we show that our approach yields valid system quality estimates when either: (i) a model trained to predict human ratings using persona ratings and source data observed under sampling bias, or (ii) a reweighting model that corrects for sampling bias is of sufficient quality. We validate our framework theoretically and via a novel Persona Simulation Framework (PSF) designed to systematically manipulate persona quality and the degree of evaluation sampling bias present in source data. Our work provides a principled foundation for combining imperfect persona ratings with human ratings observed under sampling bias to obtain valid system quality estimates.
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.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext 74cacd76-2206-4644-9f46-a73cfacf5d46Cited by top-tier papers1
Ask how each one uses itBuilds on13
- Whose Opinions Do Language Models Reflect?Shibani Santurkar, Esin Durmus, Faisal Ladhak, Cinoo Lee et al.ICML 2023 · 764 citations
- The Psychological Well-Being of Content Moderators: The Emotional Labor of Commercial Moderation and Avenues for Improving SupportMiriah Steiger, Timir J. Bharucha, Sukrit Venkatagiri, Martin J. Riedl et al.CHI 2021 · 168 citations
- Using Imperfect Surrogates for Downstream Inference: Design-based Supervised Learning for Social Science Applications of Large Language ModelsNaoki Egami, Musashi Hinck, Brandon M. Stewart, Hanying WeiNeurIPS 2023 · 74 citations
- RieszNet and ForestRiesz: Automatic Debiased Machine Learning with Neural Nets and Random ForestsVictor Chernozhukov, Whitney Newey, Victor Quintas-Martinez, Vasilis SyrgkanisICML 2022 · 61 citations
- From Generation to Judgment: Opportunities and Challenges of LLM-as-a-judgeDawei Li, Bohan Jiang, Liangjie Huang, Alimohammad Beigi et al.EMNLP 2025 · 37 citations
Related papers
- JuStRank: Benchmarking LLM Judges for System RankingAriel Gera, Odellia Boni, Yotam Perlitz, Roy Bar-Haim et al.ACL 2025
- 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
- Validating LLM-as-a-Judge Systems under Rating IndeterminacyLuke Guerdan, Solon Barocas, Kenneth Holstein, Hanna M. Wallach et al.NeurIPS 2025 · 31 citations
- Quantifying Biases in LLM-as-a-Judge EvaluationsMagda Dubois, Harry Coppock, Mario Giulianelli, Ole Jorgensen et al.ICML 2026
- A Computational Framework for Evaluating Human-likeness in LLMs' Open-ended Human BehaviorsYuxuan Lei, Jianxun Lian, Defu Lian, Jincenzi Wu et al.ICML 2026
