Prometheus 2: An Open Source Language Model Specialized in Evaluating Other Language Models
Seungone Kim, Juyoung Suk, Shayne Longpre, Bill Yuchen Lin, Jamin Shin, Sean Welleck, Graham Neubig, Moontae Lee, Kyungjae Lee, Minjoon Seo
Abstract
Proprietary LMs such as GPT-4 are often employed to assess the quality of responses from various LMs. However, concerns including transparency, controllability, and affordability strongly motivate the development of opensource LMs specialized in evaluations. On the other hand, existing open evaluator LMs exhibit critical shortcomings: 1) they issue scores that significantly diverge from those assigned by humans, and 2) they lack the flexibility to perform both direct assessment and pairwise ranking, the two most prevalent forms of assessment. Additionally, they often do not possess the ability to evaluate based on custom evaluation criteria, focusing instead on general attributes like helpfulness and harmlessness. To address these issues, we introduce Prometheus 2. Prometheus 2 is more powerful than its predecessor, and closely mirrors human and GPT-4 judgements. Moreover, it is capable of processing both direct assessment and pair-wise ranking formats grouped with a user-defined evaluation criteria. On four direct assessment benchmarks and four pairwise ranking benchmarks, PROMETHEUS 2 scores the highest correlation and agreement with humans and proprietary LM judges among all tested open evaluator LMs. Our models, code, and data are all publicly available. 1 * equal contribution. Work was done while Seungone was an intern at LG AI Research and a MS student at KAIST.
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 e350f8a5-f7b7-405b-9bc0-c7fc2cc614d8Cited by top-tier papers125
- Scaling up Test-Time Compute with Latent Reasoning: A Recurrent Depth ApproachJonas Geiping, Sean McLeish, Neel Jain, John Kirchenbauer et al.NeurIPS 2025 · 431 citations
- Rubrics as Rewards: Reinforcement Learning Beyond Verifiable DomainsAnisha Gunjal, Anthony Wang, Elaine Lau, Vaskar Nath et al.ICLR 2026 · 340 citations
- Preference Leakage: A Contamination Problem in LLM-as-a-judgeDawei Li, Renliang Sun, Yue Huang, Ming Zhong et al.ICLR 2026 · 150 citations
- Aligning to Thousands of Preferences via System Message GeneralizationSeongyun Lee, Sue Hyun Park, Seungone Kim, Minjoon SeoNeurIPS 2024 · 102 citations
- J1: Incentivizing Thinking in LLM-as-a-Judge via Reinforcement LearningChenxi Whitehouse, Tianlu Wang, Ping Yu, Xian Li et al.ICLR 2026 · 74 citations
Builds on13
- BERTScore: Evaluating Text Generation with BERTTianyi Zhang, Varsha Kishore, Felix Wu, Kilian Q. Weinberger et al.ICLR 2020 · 8,443 citations
- AlpacaFarm: A Simulation Framework for Methods that Learn from Human FeedbackYann Dubois, Chen Xuechen Li, Rohan Taori, Tianyi Zhang et al.NeurIPS 2023 · 948 citations
- ChatEval: Towards Better LLM-based Evaluators through Multi-Agent DebateChi-Min Chan, Weize Chen, Yusheng Su, Jianxuan Yu et al.ICLR 2024 · 871 citations
- Merging Models with Fisher-Weighted AveragingMichael Matena, Colin RaffelNeurIPS 2022 · 741 citations
- Language Models are Super Mario: Absorbing Abilities from Homologous Models as a Free LunchLe Yu, Bowen Yu, Haiyang Yu, Fei Huang et al.ICML 2024 · 605 citations
Related papers
- Prometheus: Inducing Fine-Grained Evaluation Capability in Language ModelsSeungone Kim, Jamin Shin, Yejin Choi, Joel Jang et al.ICLR 2024 · 468 citations
- PiCO: Peer Review in LLMs based on Consistency OptimizationKun-Peng Ning, Shuo Yang, Yuyang Liu, Jia-Yu Yao et al.ICLR 2025
- CriticEval: Evaluating Large-scale Language Model as CriticTian Lan, Wenwei Zhang, Chen Xu, Heyan Huang et al.NeurIPS 2024 · 26 citations
- Themis: A Reference-free NLG Evaluation Language Model with Flexibility and InterpretabilityXinyu Hu, Li Lin, Mingqi Gao, Xunjian Yin et al.EMNLP 2024 · 2 citations
- LLMs Cannot Reliably Identify and Reason About Security Vulnerabilities (Yet?): A Comprehensive Evaluation, Framework, and BenchmarksSaad Ullah, Mingji Han, Saurabh Pujar, Hammond Pearce et al.S&P 2024 · 167 citations
