Share your thoughts, 1 month free Claude Pro on usSee more
WorkDL logo mark

REAL: Regression-Aware Reinforcement Learning for LLM-as-a-Judge

About

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed as automated evaluators that assign numeric scores to model outputs, a paradigm known as LLM-as-a-Judge. However, standard Reinforcement Learning (RL) methods typically rely on binary rewards (e.g., 0-1 accuracy), thereby ignoring the ordinal structure inherent in regression tasks; for instance, they fail to recognize that predicting 4 is significantly better than predicting 1 when the ground truth is 5. Conversely, existing regression-aware approaches are often confined to Supervised Fine-Tuning (SFT), limiting their ability to explore optimal reasoning paths. To bridge this gap, we propose \textbf{REAL} (\underline{RE}gression-\underline{A}ware Reinforcement \underline{L}earning), a principled RL framework designed to optimize regression rewards, and also proven to be optimal for correlation metrics. A key technical challenge is that the regression objective is explicitly policy-dependent, thus invalidating standard policy gradient methods. To address this, we employ the generalized policy gradient estimator, which naturally decomposes optimization into two complementary components: (1) exploration over Chain-of-Thought (CoT) trajectory, and (2) regression-aware prediction refinement of the final score. Extensive experiments across model scales (8B to 32B) demonstrate that REAL consistently outperforms both regression-aware SFT baselines and standard RL methods, exhibiting significantly better generalization on out-of-domain benchmarks. On Qwen3-32B specifically, we achieve gains of +8.40 Pearson and +7.20 Spearman correlation over the SFT baseline, and +18.30/+11.20 over the base model. These findings highlight the critical value of integrating regression objectives into RL exploration for accurate LLM evaluation.

Yasi Zhang, Tianyu Chen, Mingyuan Zhou, Oscar Leong, Ying Nian Wu, Michal Lukasik• 2026

Related benchmarks

TaskDatasetResultRank
LLM-as-a-judge evaluationFLASK
Pearson's r0.589
36
LLM-as-a-judge evaluationMT-Bench
Pearson's r0.689
36
LLM-as-a-judge evaluationFB Bench (Feedback Bench)
Pearson's r0.932
36
LLM-as-a-judge evaluationVicuna benchmark
Pearson Correlation (r)65.1
20
LLM-as-a-judge evaluationAverage Across FB Bench, FLASK, Vic. Bench, MT Bench
Pearson (r)71
20
Showing 5 of 5 rows

Other info

Follow for update