Lune

ACL Findings2025

Learning to Align Multi-Faceted Evaluation: A Unified and Robust Framework

Kaishuai Xu, Tiezheng Yu, Yi Cheng, Wenjun Hou, Liangyou Li, Xin Jiang, Lifeng Shang, Qun Liu, Wenjie Li

Abstract

Large Language Models (LLMs) are being used more and more extensively for automated evaluation in various scenarios. Previous studies have attempted to fine-tune open-source LLMs to replicate the evaluation explanations and judgments of powerful proprietary models, such as GPT-4. However, these methods are largely limited to text-based analyses under predefined general criteria, resulting in reduced adaptability for unseen instructions and demonstrating instability in evaluating adherence to quantitative and structural constraints. To address these limitations, we propose a novel evaluation framework, ARJudge, that adaptively formulates evaluation criteria and synthesizes both text-based and code-driven analyses to evaluate LLM responses. ARJudge consists of two components: a fine-tuned Analyzer that generates multi-faceted evaluation analyses and a tuning-free Refiner that combines and refines all analyses to make the final judgment. We construct a Composite Analysis Corpus that integrates tasks for evaluation criteria generation alongside text-based and code-driven analysis generation to train the Analyzer. Our results demonstrate that ARJudge outperforms existing fine-tuned evaluators in effectiveness and robustness. Furthermore, it demonstrates the importance of multi-faceted evaluation and code-driven analyses in enhancing evaluation capabilities.

Ask Lune

Ask anything. The answer quotes the paper.

Lune reads all of it and the papers around it, then shows you the passages behind every answer.

Questions to start from

Lune answers from

the full paper · related work

Get the answer

Free to start. No credit card required.

Builds on14

  1. Direct Preference Optimization: Your Language Model is Secretly a Reward ModelRafael Rafailov, Archit Sharma, Eric Mitchell, Christopher D. Manning et al.NeurIPS 2023 · 10,924 citations
  2. G-Eval: NLG Evaluation using Gpt-4 with Better Human AlignmentYang Liu, Dan Iter, Yichong Xu, Shuohang Wang et al.EMNLP 2023 · 549 citations
  3. Self-Instruct: Aligning Language Models with Self-Generated InstructionsYizhong Wang, Yeganeh Kordi, Swaroop Mishra, Alisa Liu et al.ACL 2023 · 540 citations
  4. Evaluating Large Language Models at Evaluating Instruction FollowingZhiyuan Zeng, Jiatong Yu, Tianyu Gao, Yu Meng et al.ICLR 2024 · 299 citations
  5. Debating with More Persuasive LLMs Leads to More Truthful AnswersAkbir Khan, John Hughes, Dan Valentine, Laura Ruis et al.ICML 2024 · 244 citations

Related papers

  1. An Empirical Study of LLM-as-a-Judge for LLM Evaluation: Fine-tuned Judge Model is not a General Substitute for GPT-4Hui Huang, Xingyuan Bu, Hongli Zhou, Yingqi Qu et al.ACL Findings 2025 · 43 citations
  2. Incentivizing Agentic Reasoning in LLM Judges via Tool-Integrated Reinforcement LearningRan Xu, Jingjing Chen, Jiayu Ye, Yu Wu et al.ICLR 2026 · 17 citations
  3. CodeJudge: Evaluating Code Generation with Large Language ModelsWeixi Tong, Tianyi ZhangEMNLP 2024 · 25 citations
  4. R-Judge: Benchmarking Safety Risk Awareness for LLM AgentsTongxin Yuan, Zhiwei He, Lingzhong Dong, Yiming Wang et al.EMNLP Findings 2024 · 46 citations
  5. CodeJudgeBench: Benchmarking LLM-as-a-Judge for Coding TasksHongchao Jiang, Yiming Chen, Yushi Cao, Hung-Yi Lee et al.ACL 2026 · 33 citations
Dusk over the sea between two cliffs drawn in fine vertical lines