「llm-as-judge」の検索結果

This skill should be used when the user asks to "evaluate LLM output quality", "set up LLM-as-judge", "build an eval rubric", "compare model outputs pairwise", or "measure agent quality".

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Advanced Evaluation workflow skill. Use this skill when the user needs This skill should be used when the user asks to "implement LLM-as-judge", "compare model outputs", "create evaluation rubrics", "mitigate evaluation bias", or mentions direct scoring, pairwise comparison, position bias, evaluation pipelines, or automated quality assessment and the operator should preserve the upstream workflow, copied support files, and provenance before merging or handing off.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Evaluate LLM outputs using frontier models as judges. Use for pairwise model comparison, quality scoring with custom rubrics, and automated evaluation pipelines. Covers position bias mitigation, statistical significance, and generating preference data for DPO/RLHF.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

This skill should be used when the user asks to "implement LLM-as-judge", "compare model outputs", "create evaluation rubrics", "mitigate evaluation bias", or mentions direct scoring, pairwise comparison, position bias, evaluation pipelines, or automated quality assessment.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Patterns and techniques for evaluating and improving AI agent outputs. Use this skill when: - Implementing self-critique and reflection loops - Building evaluator-optimizer pipelines for quality-critical generation - Creating test-driven code refinement workflows - Designing rubric-based or LLM-as-judge evaluation systems - Adding iterative improvement to agent outputs (code, reports, analysis) - Measuring and improving agent response quality

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Handles LLM-as-judge evaluation workflows on Arize including creating/updating evaluators, running evaluations on spans or experiments, managing tasks, trigger-run operations, column mapping, and continuous monitoring. Use when the user mentions create evaluator, LLM judge, hallucination, faithfulness, correctness, relevance, run eval, score spans, score experiment, trigger-run, column mapping, continuous monitoring, or improve evaluator prompt.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Measures and improves the quality of AI models and agents on Google Cloud using the Eval Quality Flywheel methodology. Use when generating synthetic user scenarios, evaluating an agent or model, building an eval dataset, picking or writing evaluation metrics, analyzing failures, comparing results before and after a fix, or when guidance is needed on Agent Platform eval methodology — including dataset schema, LLM-as-judge scoring, and common failure causes. For fine-tuning, use agent-platform-tuning. For general production deployment, use agent-platform-deploy.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Autonomous optimization loop — hill-climb any target. Code with metrics, or skills/prompts/agents with LLM-as-judge. USE WHEN optimize, hill climb, improve metric, reduce latency, optimize skill, optimize prompt, eval mode.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

This skill should be used for advanced LLM evaluation: LLM-as-judge systems, direct scoring, pairwise comparison, rubric calibration, evaluator bias mitigation, confidence scoring, and automated quality assessment.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

This skill should be used when the user wants to "run an evaluation", "evaluate my agent", "evaluate my ADK agent", "write an eval dataset", "analyze eval failures", "compare eval results", "optimize agent", or needs guidance on the Gemini platform eval methodology and the Quality Flywheel. Covers eval metrics, dataset schema, LLM-as-judge scoring, and common failure causes. Applies to any agents-cli project, whatever framework the agent is written in. Do NOT use for agent API code patterns (ADK: use google-agents-cli-adk-code), deployment (use google-agents-cli-deploy), or project scaffolding (use google-agents-cli-scaffold).

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Validates Terminal User Interface (TUI) output using freeze for screenshot capture and LLM-as-judge for semantic validation. Supports both visual (PNG/SVG) and text-based validation modes.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Master context engineering for AI agent systems. Use when designing agent architectures, debugging context failures, optimizing token usage, implementing memory systems, building multi-agent coordination, evaluating agent performance, or developing LLM-powered pipelines. Covers context fundamentals, degradation patterns, optimization techniques (compaction, masking, caching), compression strategies, memory architectures, multi-agent patterns, LLM-as-Judge evaluation, tool design, and project development.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Implement a task step by step with automated LLM-as-Judge verification at the end of each phase

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Design LLM-as-Judge evaluators for subjective criteria that code-based checks cannot handle. Use when a failure mode requires interpretation (tone, faithfulness, relevance, completeness). Do NOT use when the failure mode can be checked with code (regex, schema validation, execution tests); use `write-code-eval`. To validate an existing judge, use `validate-evaluator`.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Configures and runs LLM evaluation using Promptfoo framework. Use when setting up prompt testing, creating evaluation configs (promptfooconfig.yaml), writing Python custom assertions, implementing llm-rubric for LLM-as-judge, or managing few-shot examples in prompts. Triggers on keywords like "promptfoo", "eval", "LLM evaluation", "prompt testing", or "model comparison".

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Generates python code that evaluates SageMaker models. Supports two evaluation types: LLM-as-Judge and Custom Scorer. Use when the user says "evaluate my model", "run a benchmark", "test model performance", "how did my model perform", "compare models", or other similar requests.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use when the user has evaluation principles or a dataset but needs help choosing the right graders, designing evaluation metrics, creating LLM-as-judge prompts, combining multiple metrics into a composite score, or building an automated evaluation pipeline. Also use when the user mentions grader selection, metric design, judge prompt engineering, rubric design, evaluation pipeline code, or "how to evaluate [X] automatically." Outputs executable OpenJudge pipeline code.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Evaluate LLM systems using automated metrics, LLM-as-judge, and benchmarks. Use when testing prompt quality, validating RAG pipelines, measuring safety (hallucinations, bias), or comparing models for production deployment.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Decomposed, multi-criteria metric design for LLM pipelines. The metric IS the model — change the metric and the optimizer changes behavior. Decompose by default; bool during compile, float during eval; calibrate against human; mitigate judge bias. Search keywords: LLM-as-judge, llm as judge, eval metric, evaluation score, scoring function, rubric, RAGAS, G-Eval, judge bias, verbosity bias, how to evaluate LLM output.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Builds an eval plan for an AI feature - error analysis on real traces, failure-mode ranking, code checks and binary LLM judges validated against human labels, CI tests, production monitoring, and a launch bar. Use when you ask how do we eval this, how do I test an AI feature, our LLM outputs are inconsistent, are the evals good enough, LLM-as-judge, hallucinations, or what accuracy is good enough to launch. Draws on 41 Lenny's Podcast guests incl. Hamel Husain, Shreya Shankar and Sander Schulhoff.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Evaluate WooAIAssistant against a structured scenario suite with hard invariants + LLM-as-judge rubric scoring. Runs live against the demo store + gpt-5.1 via the woo-mobile-ai backend wrapper, writes a JSONL run record, compares against stored baselines, and surfaces regressions. Always delegated to a subagent so the main context only sees the markdown report.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use when designing a study that benchmarks AI systems against a human-expert panel, before data collection. Plans the arms, decoupled rubrics with anchors, planted calibration probes, reviewer panel, inter-rater reliability targets and LLM-as-judge versus human adjudication.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

This skill should be used when the user asks to "implement LLM-as-judge", "compare model outputs", "create evaluation rubrics", "mitigate evaluation bias", or mentions direct scoring, pairwise comparison, position bias, evaluation pipelines, or automated quality assessment.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Patterns and techniques for evaluating and improving AI agent outputs. Use this skill when: - Implementing self-critique and reflection loops - Building evaluator-optimizer pipelines for quality-critical generation - Creating test-driven code refinement workflows - Designing rubric-based or LLM-as-judge evaluation systems - Adding iterative improvement to agent outputs (code, reports, analysis) - Measuring and improving agent response quality

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。