Predicting Disagreement with Human Raters in LLM-as-a-Judge Difficulty Assessment without Using Generation-Time Probability Signals
Fuente:
arXiv
Gespeichert in:
| 1. Verfasser: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Preprint |
| Veröffentlicht: |
2026
|
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| _version_ | 1866913119033360384 |
|---|---|
| author | Ehara, Yo |
| author_facet | Ehara, Yo |
| contents | Automatic generation of educational materials using large language models (LLMs) is becoming increasingly common, but assigning difficulty levels to such materials still requires substantial human effort. LLM-as-a-Judge has therefore attracted attention, yet disagreement with human raters remains a major challenge. We propose a method for predicting which LLM-generated difficulty ratings are likely to disagree with human raters, so that such cases can be sent for re-rating. Unlike prior approaches, our method does not rely on generation-time probability signals, which must be collected during rating generation and are often difficult to compare across LLMs. Instead, exploiting the fact that difficulty is an ordinal scale, we use a separate embedding space, such as ModernBERT, and identify disagreement candidates based on the geometric consistency of the rating set. Experiments on English CEFR-based sentence difficulty assessment with GPT-OSS-120B and Qwen3-235B-A22B showed that the proposed method achieved higher AUC for predicting disagreement with human raters than probability-based baselines. |
| format | Preprint |
| id |
arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2605_12422 |
| institution | arXiv |
| publishDate | 2026 |
| record_format | arxiv |
| spellingShingle | Predicting Disagreement with Human Raters in LLM-as-a-Judge Difficulty Assessment without Using Generation-Time Probability Signals Ehara, Yo Computation and Language Computers and Society Automatic generation of educational materials using large language models (LLMs) is becoming increasingly common, but assigning difficulty levels to such materials still requires substantial human effort. LLM-as-a-Judge has therefore attracted attention, yet disagreement with human raters remains a major challenge. We propose a method for predicting which LLM-generated difficulty ratings are likely to disagree with human raters, so that such cases can be sent for re-rating. Unlike prior approaches, our method does not rely on generation-time probability signals, which must be collected during rating generation and are often difficult to compare across LLMs. Instead, exploiting the fact that difficulty is an ordinal scale, we use a separate embedding space, such as ModernBERT, and identify disagreement candidates based on the geometric consistency of the rating set. Experiments on English CEFR-based sentence difficulty assessment with GPT-OSS-120B and Qwen3-235B-A22B showed that the proposed method achieved higher AUC for predicting disagreement with human raters than probability-based baselines. |
| title | Predicting Disagreement with Human Raters in LLM-as-a-Judge Difficulty Assessment without Using Generation-Time Probability Signals |
| topic | Computation and Language Computers and Society |
| url | https://arxiv.org/abs/2605.12422 |