Recent advancements in large language models (LLMs) have given rise to the LLM-as-a-judge paradigm, showcasing their potential to deliver human-like judgments. However, in the field of machine translation (MT) evaluation, current LLM-as-a-judge methods fall short of learned automatic metrics. In this paper, we propose Multidimensional Multi-Agent Debate (M-MAD), a systematic LLM-based multi-agent framework for advanced LLM-as-a-judge MT evaluation. Our findings demonstrate that M-MAD achieves significant advancements by (1) decoupling heuristic MQM criteria into distinct evaluation dimensions for fine-grained assessments; (2) employing multi-agent debates to harness the collaborative reasoning capabilities of LLMs; (3) synthesizing dimension-specific results into a final evaluation judgment to ensure robust and reliable outcomes. Comprehensive experiments show that M-MAD not only outperforms all existing LLM-as-a-judge methods but also competes with state-of-the-art reference-based automatic metrics, even when powered by a suboptimal model like GPT-4o mini. Detailed ablations and analysis highlight the superiority of our framework design, offering a fresh perspective for LLM-as-a-judge paradigm. Our code and data are publicly available at https://github.com/SU-JIAYUAN/M-MAD.

This study aims to address the pervasive challenge of quantifying uncertainty in large language models (LLMs) with black-box API access. Conformal Prediction (CP), known for its model-agnostic and distribution-free features, is a desired approach for various LLMs and data distributions. However, existing CP methods for LLMs typically assume access to the logits, which are unavailable for some API-only LLMs. In addition, logits are known to be miscalibrated, potentially leading to degraded CP performance. To tackle these challenges, we introduce a novel CP method that (1) is tailored for API-only LLMs without logit-access; (2) minimizes the size of prediction sets; and (3) ensures a statistical guarantee of the user-defined coverage. The core idea of this approach is to formulate nonconformity measures using both coarse-grained (i.e., sample frequency) and fine-grained uncertainty notions (e.g., semantic similarity). Experimental results on both close-ended and open-ended Question Answering tasks show our approach can mostly outperform the logit-based CP baselines.