Potential and Perils of Large Language Models as Judges of Unstructured
  Textual Data
Rapid advancements in large language models have unlocked remarkable
capabilities when it comes to processing and summarizing unstructured text
data. This has implications for the analysis of rich, open-ended datasets, such
as survey responses, where LLMs hold the promise of efficiently distilling key
themes and sentiments. However, as organizations increasingly turn to these
powerful AI systems to make sense of textual feedback, a critical question
arises, can we trust LLMs to accurately represent the perspectives contained
within these text based datasets? While LLMs excel at generating human-like
summaries, there is a risk that their outputs may inadvertently diverge from
the true substance of the original responses. Discrepancies between the
LLM-generated outputs and the actual themes present in the data could lead to
flawed decision-making, with far-reaching consequences for organizations. This
research investigates the effectiveness of LLMs as judge models to evaluate the
thematic alignment of summaries generated by other LLMs. We utilized an
Anthropic Claude model to generate thematic summaries from open-ended survey
responses, with Amazon's Titan Express, Nova Pro, and Meta's Llama serving as
LLM judges. The LLM-as-judge approach was compared to human evaluations using
Cohen's kappa, Spearman's rho, and Krippendorff's alpha, validating a scalable
alternative to traditional human centric evaluation methods. Our findings
reveal that while LLMs as judges offer a scalable solution comparable to human
raters, humans may still excel at detecting subtle, context-specific nuances.
This research contributes to the growing body of knowledge on AI assisted text
analysis. We discuss limitations and provide recommendations for future
research, emphasizing the need for careful consideration when generalizing LLM
judge models across various contexts and use cases.
678748ee95b9364769858656
Rewina Bedemariam
admin_assigned
2025-01-15T17:01:26.170Z
667482835a2cb9e96011aac1
/avatars/d6072736df0dbf7f3b8741bc7782b7fd.svg
Rewina Bedemariam
user
RewyB
678748ee95b9364769858657
Natalie Perez
678748ee95b9364769858658
Sreyoshi Bhaduri
admin_assigned
2025-01-15T17:01:37.500Z
6760b279deb31f2c1e5b4f42
/avatars/b3863ab0d63d052198dc9b4261def623.svg
sreyoshi bhaduri
user
sreyoshibhaduri
678748ee95b9364769858659
Satya Kapoor
678748ee95b936476985865a
Alex Gil
admin_assigned
2025-01-15T17:02:07.216Z
6660d475754f90a858038310
/avatars/a279a0ede35953f1d860d0fdfc053e57.svg
Alex Gil
user
alexgil
678748ee95b936476985865b
Elizabeth Conjar
678748ee95b936476985865c
Ikkei Itoku
admin_assigned
2025-01-15T17:02:49.300Z
6760b36ee4b55ba1b2b35103
/avatars/27df8f19ba16e8d9cce4d224e57853bb.svg
Ikkei Itoku
user
ikkeiitoku
678748ee95b936476985865d
David Theil
678748ee95b936476985865e
Aman Chadha
claimed_verified
2025-01-15T08:47:10.299Z
63a4754927f1f64ed7238dac
https://cdn-avatars.huggingface.co/v1/production/uploads/63a4754927f1f64ed7238dac/aH-eJF-31g4vof9jv2gmI.jpeg
Aman Chadha
user
amanchadha
678748ee95b936476985865f
Naumaan Nayyar
Potential and Perils of Large Language Models as Judges of Unstructured
  Textual Data
Rapid advancements in large language models have unlocked remarkable
capabilities when it comes to processing and summarizing unstructured text
data. This has implications for the analysis of rich, open-ended datasets, such
as survey responses, where LLMs hold the promise of efficiently distilling key
themes and sentiments. However, as organizations increasingly turn to these
powerful AI systems to make sense of textual feedback, a critical question
arises, can we trust LLMs to accurately represent the perspectives contained
within these text based datasets? While LLMs excel at generating human-like
summaries, there is a risk that their outputs may inadvertently diverge from
the true substance of the original responses. Discrepancies between the
LLM-generated outputs and the actual themes present in the data could lead to
flawed decision-making, with far-reaching consequences for organizations. This
research investigates the effectiveness of LLMs as judge models to evaluate the
thematic alignment of summaries generated by other LLMs. We utilized an
Anthropic Claude model to generate thematic summaries from open-ended survey
responses, with Amazon's Titan Express, Nova Pro, and Meta's Llama serving as
LLM judges. The LLM-as-judge approach was compared to human evaluations using
Cohen's kappa, Spearman's rho, and Krippendorff's alpha, validating a scalable
alternative to traditional human centric evaluation methods. Our findings
reveal that while LLMs as judges offer a scalable solution comparable to human
raters, humans may still excel at detecting subtle, context-specific nuances.
This research contributes to the growing body of knowledge on AI assisted text
analysis. We discuss limitations and provide recommendations for future
research, emphasizing the need for careful consideration when generalizing LLM
judge models across various contexts and use cases.
LLMs can effectively evaluate thematic summaries generated by other LLMs, offering a scalable alternative to human raters, though humans excel at detecting subtle nuances.
large language models LLMs thematic summaries Anthropic Claude Amazon's Titan Express Nova Pro Meta's Llama Cohen's kappa Spearman's rho Krippendorff's alpha AI-assisted text analysis