Paper detail

AdaJudge: Adaptive Multi-Perspective Judging for Reward Modeling

Reward modeling is essential for aligning large language models with human preferences, yet predominant architectures rely on a static pooling strategy to condense sequences into scalar scores. This paradigm, however, suffers from two key limitations: a static inductive bias that misaligns with task-dependent preference signals, and a representational mismatch, as the backbone is optimized for generation rather than fine-grained discrimination. To address this, we propose AdaJudge, a unified framework that jointly adapts representation and aggregation. AdaJudge first refines backbone representations into a discrimination-oriented space via gated refinement blocks. It then replaces the static readout with an adaptive multi-view pooling module that dynamically routes and combines evidence. Extensive experiments on RM-Bench and JudgeBench show that AdaJudge outperforms strong off-the-shelf reward models and traditional pooling baselines.

preprint2026arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.