Rankers, Judges, and Assistants: Towards Understanding the Interplay of LLMs in Information Retrieval Evaluation

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly integral to information retrieval (IR), powering ranking, evaluation, and AI-assisted content creation. This widespread adoption necessitates a critical examination of potential biases arising from the interplay between these LLM-based components. This paper synthesizes existing research and presents novel experiment designs that explore how LLM-based rankers and assistants influence LLM-based judges. We provide the first empirical evidence of LLM judges exhibiting significant bias towards LLM-based rankers. Furthermore, we observe limitations in LLM judges' ability to discern subtle system performance differences. Contrary to some previous findings, our preliminary study does not find evidence of bias against AI-generated content. These results highlight the need for a more holistic view of the LLM-driven information ecosystem. To this end, we offer initial guidelines and a research agenda to ensure the reliable use of LLMs in IR evaluation.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Published
2025-07-13
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1145/3726302.3730348
Citations
12
Primary Topic
Data Quality and Management
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
25.28
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Rankers, Judges, and Assistants: Towards Understanding the Interplay of LLMs in Information Retrieval Evaluation

Donald Metzler, Krisztian Balog, Zhen Qin
12 citations
Data Quality and Management
25.28
article

Rankers, Judges, and Assistants: Towards Understanding the Interplay of LLMs in Information Retrieval Evaluation

Donald Metzler, Krisztian Balog, Zhen Qin
article en
12 citations

Abstract

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly integral to information retrieval (IR), powering ranking, evaluation, and AI-assisted content creation. This widespread adoption necessitates a critical examination of potential biases arising from the interplay between these LLM-based components. This paper synthesizes existing research and presents novel experiment designs that explore how LLM-based rankers and assistants influence LLM-based judges. We provide the first empirical evidence of LLM judges exhibiting significant bias towards LLM-based rankers. Furthermore, we observe limitations in LLM judges' ability to discern subtle system performance differences. Contrary to some previous findings, our preliminary study does not find evidence of bias against AI-generated content. These results highlight the need for a more holistic view of the LLM-driven information ecosystem. To this end, we offer initial guidelines and a research agenda to ensure the reliable use of LLMs in IR evaluation.

Google (United States) (US)
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 0%
Data Quality and Management
25.28
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.