Quantiles, Not Points: Streaming Quantile Matching for Ordinal-Aware LLM-as-a-Judge Calibration
arXiv:2611.00447v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: LLM-as-a-judge scores are often distributionally shifted from human ratings on any given evaluation task, and post-hoc calibration (mapping LLM to human scores in a small labeled anchor set) has become a popular method to correct for this shift. In this paper we derive the calibration from two positions: that LLMaJ scores are ordinal ratings drawn from a distribution rather than isolated points. We present streaming quantile matching (SQM), a versi
Read original source
Source record
Research analysis
Research claim
Paper identifier: 2611.00447. Source account: arXiv:2611.00447v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: LLM-as-a-judge scores are often distributionally shifted from human ratings on any given evaluation task, and post-hoc calibration (mapping LLM to human scores in a small labeled anchor set) has become a popular method to correct for this shift. In this paper we derive the calibration from two positions: that LLMaJ scores are ordinal ratings drawn from a distribution rather than isolated points. We present streaming quantile matching (SQM), a versi
Evaluation record
Recent records to compare: “Human-like cross-language generalisation in deep neural speaker embeddings and its acoustic foundations” (arXiv, Nov 5, 2026); “When to Ask, When to Answer: Strategic Clarification for Ambiguous Reference Resolution in Dialogue” (arXiv, Nov 5, 2026). Shared themes are navigation hints; they have not been verified as the same need or independent corroboration.
What the result supports
Interpret results only for the reported model version, task, data and inference budget. Community votes, downloads or a benchmark position do not establish reliability in a different workflow.
Validity gaps
Check sample selection, baseline configuration, uncertainty, contamination risk, negative results and access to code or weights. No reproduction by WeWorkBuddy is recorded here.
Verification plan
Read the paper or model card and its evaluation appendix. Reproduce one bounded result against the stated baseline, then test a representative user task and record where the conclusion fails.