PPI-corrected tests show how human labels reduce LLM judge bias
IanArawjo · x · 2026-07-24
The author says PPI-corrected statistical tests work on real LLM-judge data with human labels.
- The gray points in the chart show how uncorrected standard tests can produce false positives when judge bias is present.
- The colored points show the corrected results after incorporating some human labels.
- The post argues that this is a practical way to make LLM-judge evaluation more trustworthy.
The main message is the same: if you rely on model judges, you need a bias-correction layer.
Related event: Eliminating LLM Evaluation False Positives with PPI-Corrected Tests(5 posts)→
More from Research
- 34 open models self-hosted on a Blackwell cluster for open health evals — keunwoochoi · 2026-10-27
- Paper: data schedules and learning rate schedules should be designed together — alifcoder · 2026-10-27
- Health benchmark study: quality and diversity of eval items beat quantity — keunwoochoi · 2026-10-27
- Across 7 tasks, highest reasoning setting isn't the best for most open models — keunwoochoi · 2026-10-27
- Open Models Match GPT-6 on MedMCQA but Trail 17 Points on Hard Clinical Cases — keunwoochoi · 2026-10-27
- Data Curriculum and LR Schedule Should Be Co-Designed: Math Data Placement Flips With Learning Rate — CatAstro_Piyush · 2026-10-27