Assessment and evaluation have long been critical challenges in artificial intelligence (AI) and natural language processing (NLP). Traditional methods, usually matching-based or small model-based, often fall short in open-ended and dynamic scenarios. Recent advancements in Large Language Models (LLMs) inspire the “LLM-as-a-judge” paradigm, where LLMs are leveraged to perform scoring, ranking, or selection for various machine learning evaluation scenarios. This paper presents a comprehensive survey of LLM-based judgment and assessment, offering an in-depth overview to review this evolving field. We first provide the definition from both input and output perspectives. Then we introduce a systematic taxonomy to explore LLM-as-a-judge along three dimensions: what to judge, how to judge, and how to benchmark. Finally, we also highlight key challenges and promising future directions for this emerging area.

The ability to accurately identify authorship is crucial for verifying content authenticity and mitigating misinformation. Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated exceptional capacity for reasoning and problem-solving. However, their potential in authorship analysis remains under-explored. Traditional studies have depended on hand-crafted stylistic features, whereas state-of-the-art approaches leverage text embeddings from pre-trained language models. These methods, which typically require fine-tuning on labeled data, often suffer from performance degradation in cross-domain applications and provide limited explainability. This work seeks to address three research questions: (1) Can LLMs perform zero-shot, end-to-end authorship verification effectively? (2) Are LLMs capable of accurately attributing authorship among multiple candidates authors (e.g., 10 and 20)? (3) Can LLMs provide explainability in authorship analysis, particularly through the role of linguistic features? Moreover, we investigate the integration of explicit linguistic features to guide LLMs in their reasoning processes. Our assessment demonstrates LLMs’ proficiency in both tasks without the need for domain-specific fine-tuning, providing explanations into their decision making via a detailed analysis of linguistic features. This establishes a new benchmark for future research on LLM-based authorship analysis.

Recent advances in large pre-trained language models (PLMs) lead to impressive gains on natural language understanding (NLU) tasks with task-specific fine-tuning. However, directly fine-tuning PLMs heavily relies on sufficient labeled training instances, which are usually hard to obtain. Prompt-based tuning on PLMs has shown to be powerful for various downstream few-shot tasks. Existing works studying prompt-based tuning for few-shot NLU tasks mainly focus on deriving proper label words with a verbalizer or generating prompt templates to elicit semantics from PLMs. In addition, conventional data augmentation strategies such as synonym substitution are also widely adopted in low-resource scenarios. However, the improvements they bring to prompt-based few-shot learning have been demonstrated to be marginal. Thus, an important research question arises as follows: how to design effective data augmentation methods for prompt-based few-shot tuning? To this end, considering the label semantics are essential in prompt-based tuning, we propose a novel label-guided data augmentation framework PromptDA, which exploits the enriched label semantic information for data augmentation. Extensive experiment results on few-shot text classification tasks show that our proposed framework achieves superior performances by effectively leveraging label semantics and data augmentation for natural language understanding.