With the increasing capability of large language models (LLMs), LLM-as-a-judge has emerged as a new evaluation paradigm. Compared with traditional automatic and manual evaluation, LLM evaluators exhibit better interpretability and efficiency. Despite this, existing LLM evaluators suffer from limited use scenarios and poor flexibility. To mitigate these issues, we propose Praetor, a fine-grained generative LLM evaluator with instance-level customazable evaluation criteria. To train Praetor, we curate a large-scale dataset guided with a hierarchical guideline covering a wide range of tasks and instance-level evaluation criteria. We train Praetor on this dataset in a multi-task learning fashion, which enables to evaluate LLMs in either pointwise grading or pairwise comparison way and support two languages simultaneously with a high flexibility of setting evaluation criteria. Extensive experiments demonstrate that Praetor outperforms previous LLM evaluators and instruction-tuned LLMs on multiple benchmarks, setting new SOTA results. It also exhibits the potential for generating critiques as scalable feedback to further improve LLMs. Our model and related resources are released at https://github.com/tjunlp-lab/Praetor.

Concept editing aims to control specific concepts in large language models (LLMs) and is an emerging subfield of model editing. Despite the emergence of various editing methods in recent years, there remains a lack of rigorous theoretical analysis and a unified perspective to systematically understand and compare these methods. To address this gap, we propose a unified paradigm for concept editing methods, in which all forms of conceptual injection are aligned at the neuron level. We study four representative concept editing methods: Neuron Editing (NE), Supervised Fine-tuning (SFT), Sparse Autoencoder (SAE), and Steering Vector (SV). Then we categorize them into two classes based on their mode of conceptual information injection: indirect (NE, SFT) and direct (SAE, SV). We evaluate above methods along four dimensions: editing reliability, output generalization, neuron level consistency, and mathematical formalization. Experiments show that SAE achieves the best editing reliability. In output generalization, SAE captures features closer to human-understood concepts, while NE tends to locate text patterns rather than true semantics. Neuron-level analysis reveals that direct methods share high neuron overlap, as do indirect methods, indicating methodological commonality within each category. Our unified paradigm offers a clear framework and valuable insights for advancing interpretability and controlled generation in LLMs.