Through the Judge's Eyes: Inferred Thinking Traces Improve Reliability of LLM Raters

TMLR Paper6432 Authors

Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used as raters for evaluation tasks. However, their reliability is often limited for subjective tasks, when human judgments involve subtle reasoning beyond annotation labels. Thinking traces, the reasoning behind a judgment, are highly informative but challenging to collect and curate. We present a human-LLM collaborative framework to infer thinking traces from label-only annotations. The proposed framework uses a simple and effective rejection sampling method to reconstruct these traces at scale. These inferred thinking traces are applied to two complementary tasks: (1) fine-tuning open LLM raters; and (2) synthesizing clearer annotation guidelines for proprietary LLM raters. Across multiple datasets, our methods lead to significantly improved LLM-human agreement. Additionally, the refined annotation guidelines increase agreement among different LLM models. These results suggest that LLMs can serve as practical proxies for otherwise unrevealed human thinking traces, enabling label-only corpora to be extended into thinking–trace–augmented resources that enhance the reliability of LLM raters.

Submission Length: Regular submission (no more than 12 pages of main content)

Assigned Action Editor: ~Ilia_Sucholutsky1

Submission Number: 6432