arXiv Science⌕ Search

arXiv subjects

Sven Kleinkop

Publications and source records attributed to Sven Kleinkop.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

PromptOps: Iterative Prompt Optimization for LLM-as-a-Judge Systems

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used as automated judges for evaluating the behavior of chatbots and other AI systems. In deployment, however, their agreement with the intended human evaluation policy may degrade as user interactions and score distributions change. Existing automatic prompt optimization methods are primarily studied as one-shot procedures on static development sets and therefore provide limited guidance for maintaining LLM judges over time. We frame this problem as judge drift and introduce PromptOps, a closedloop framework for monitoring and iteratively recalibrating LLM-as-a-Judge (LLMaaJ) systems. PromptOps separates four operational decisions: when to optimize, which optimization procedure to apply, which feedback records to use, and how to update the judge prompt. We instantiate the framework with five prompt optimization methods: GEPA, SIMBA, Rubric Synthesis, and exemplar selection using either simulated annealing or a Tree-structured Parzen Estimator. Our experiments demonstrate that iterative prompt optimization can recalibrate LLM judges and recover performance after controlled shifts in the referencescore distribution. However, effective maintenance is inherently contextdependent: neither optimization algorithm choice nor update timing generalizes universally across settings. These findings establish prompt optimization for deployed LLM judges as an inherently iterative maintenance problem and demonstrate that PromptOps provides a practical abstraction for studying and implementing this process.

cs.AI↗

Adapting LLM Judges to Observed Human Annotation Policy through Soft Prompt Tuning

Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly employed as automated judges for evaluating chatbot responses. While proprietary models can achieve high agreement with human annotators, they remain costly and difficult to deploy in practical settings. Lightweight open-source LLM judges provide an attractive alternative but typically exhibit lower agreement with human ratings. In this paper, we investigate whether soft prompt tuning can align open-source LLM judges more closely with human annotation policy. We train soft prompts on the FairBotBench benchmark and evaluate the adapted judges across the dimensions of bias, toxicity, and personalization. Our findings demonstrate that hybrid soft-prompt tuning, which combines textual prompts with learned continuous prompt embeddings, consistently improves agreement with human annotations over the corresponding untuned baselines. For Qwen 3.5 9B, the adapted judges surpass both hosted reference judges across all three evaluation dimensions.

cs.CL↗