LLM-Assisted Relevance Assessments: When Should We Ask LLMs for Help?

Test collections are information retrieval tools that allow researchers to quickly and easily evaluate ranking algorithms. While test collections have become an integral part of IR research, the process of data creation involves significant manual annotation effort, which often makes it very expensive and time-consuming. Consequently, test collections could become too small when the budget is limited, which may lead to unstable evaluations. As a cheaper alternative, recent studies have proposed the use of large language models (LLMs) to completely replace human assessors. However, while LLMs seem to somewhat correlate with human judgments, their predictions are not perfect and often show bias. Thus, a complete replacement with LLMs is argued to be too risky and not fully reliable.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Published
2025-07-13
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1145/3726302.3729916
Citations
6
Primary Topic
Artificial Intelligence in Law
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
51.13
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

LLM-Assisted Relevance Assessments: When Should We Ask LLMs for Help?

Tetsuya Sakai, Ellen M. Voorhees, Ian Soboroff, Rikiya Takehi
6 citations
Artificial Intelligence in Law
51.13
article

LLM-Assisted Relevance Assessments: When Should We Ask LLMs for Help?

Tetsuya Sakai, Ellen M. Voorhees, Ian Soboroff, Rikiya Takehi
article en
6 citations

Abstract

Test collections are information retrieval tools that allow researchers to quickly and easily evaluate ranking algorithms. While test collections have become an integral part of IR research, the process of data creation involves significant manual annotation effort, which often makes it very expensive and time-consuming. Consequently, test collections could become too small when the budget is limited, which may lead to unstable evaluations. As a cheaper alternative, recent studies have proposed the use of large language models (LLMs) to completely replace human assessors. However, while LLMs seem to somewhat correlate with human judgments, their predictions are not perfect and often show bias. Thus, a complete replacement with LLMs is argued to be too risky and not fully reliable.

National Institute of Standards and Technology (US), Waseda University (JP)
Openalex Percentile: Top 0%
Artificial Intelligence in Law
51.13
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

LLM-Assisted Relevance Assessments: When Should We Ask LLMs for Help? — Tetsuya Sakai, Ellen M. Voorhees, et al. · (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS