aiqbench analysis
This paper introduces a rigorous statistical framework for evaluating LLM judge panels by relaxing the standard assumption that external anchors are error-free. It provides closed-form estimators to detect and quantify contamination correlations between judges and anchors under a single-common-factor model, complete with diagnostic tools to validate model assumptions. For AI safety researchers, this work offers critical methods to distinguish genuine quality signals from shared systematic errors in automated evaluation pipelines.
A Closed-Form Estimator and Diagnostic Battery for Anchor-Judge Error Correlation, Under a Single-Common-Factor Model
arXiv:2609.08826v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: When an external reference set (an anchor) is used to decompose an LLM-judge panel's error into a quality signal and a shared common-mode error, standard practice assumes the anchor is uncontaminated: its error uncorrelated with the judges' shared error. We study when that assumption can be dropped and replaced by an estimate. Under a single-common-factor model, >=2 judges and >=2 anchors point-identify the quality variance, the common-mode variance, and each anchor's contamination correlation rho_k in closed form, with an exact per-anchor-pair failure boundary; a designated clean-anchor estimator, by contrast, reports a contaminated companion anchor as fully clean once its trusted anchor is itself contaminated. Because the single-common-factor assumption is itself untestable, the estimator ships gated behind a calibrated diagnostic battery (judge-covariance dispersion; over-identification; a family-block test from judge metadata, with a family-blocked estimator that removes family-level shared-residual bias exactly), bootstrap confidence intervals with measured coverage, and a weak-identification screen. A proposition maps which violations bias rho_k, in which direction, and which evade detection. For ordinal scores we show an identification hierarchy: with all variables ordinal, rho_k is not identified at any number of anchors; with ordinal judges and >=3 continuous anchors it is, and we give an estimator for that case. On real data the validation is asymmetric, and we say so plainly: the diagnostics are validated in the rejecting direction (both real panels we test are correctly rejected by the model-adequacy pre-test), while the estimator is validated in simulation and stress-tested semi-synthetically under oracle calibration; no real panel has yet passed the pre-test, and the pre-test exists precisely to say so. All results replay offline from shipped, checksummed artifacts.
Abstract:When an external reference set (an anchor) is used to decompose an LLM-judge panel's error into a quality signal and a shared common-mode error, standard practice assumes the anchor is uncontaminated: its error uncorrelated with the judges' shared error. We study when that assumption can be dropped and replaced by an estimate. Under a single-common-factor model, >=2 judges and >=2 anchors point-identify the quality variance, the common-mode variance, and each anchor's contamination correlation rho_k in closed form, with an exact per-anchor-pair failure boundary; a designated clean-anchor estimator, by contrast, reports a contaminated companion anchor as fully clean once its trusted anchor is itself contaminated. Because the single-common-factor assumption is itself untestable, the estimator ships gated behind a calibrated diagnostic battery (judge-covariance dispersion; over-identification; a family-block test from judge metadata, with a family-blocked estimator that removes family-level shared-residual bias exactly), bootstrap confidence intervals with measured coverage, and a weak-identification screen. A proposition maps which violations bias rho_k, in which direction, and which evade detection. For ordinal scores we show an identification hierarchy: with all variables ordinal, rho_k is not identified at any number of anchors; with ordinal judges and >=3 continuous anchors it is, and we give an estimator for that case. On real data the validation is asymmetric, and we say so plainly: the diagnostics are validated in the rejecting direction (both real panels we test are correctly rejected by the model-adequacy pre-test), while the estimator is validated in simulation and stress-tested semi-synthetically under oracle calibration; no real panel has yet passed the pre-test, and the pre-test exists precisely to say so. All results replay offline from shipped, checksummed artifacts.
11 pages. The complete reproduction artifact (code, frozen data, one-command replay) accompanies the paper's journal submission as supplementary material, currently under peer review; a public repository link will be added upon publication
Methodology (stat.ME); Computation and Language (cs.CL); Machine Learning (cs.LG)
arXiv:2609.08826 [stat.ME]
(or arXiv:2609.08826v1 [stat.ME] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.08826 arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
Full text under the publisher's open licence · 326 words
Related coverage

News
Quantum Computing Report · Jun 7, 2026

An unexamined cause of the OpenAI Hugging Face hacking incident: its binary performance metric
LessWrong · Sep 23, 2026
News Archive 2026
Quantum Computing Report · Jul 25, 2026

Examining AI Swarm Efficiency with the AI Futures Model
LessWrong · Oct 19, 2026