Chain-of-Models: Cross-Model Auditing for Bias-Robust LLM Judges
arXiv:2607.28636v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: LLMs increasingly serve as automated judges, but their judgments remain vulnerable to cognitive biases. Existing mitigations mostly rely on prompt-driven debiasing, which is brittle across bias types, or human evaluation, which does not scale. We study \emph{Chain-of-Models} (CoM), an automated audit pipeline in which a second model inspects the first model's reasoning trace before producing the final judgment. The key design question is whether
Record details
Published: 3 August 2026
Source: arXiv cs.CY
Category: Research
Topics: Bias & fairness · Transparency
Retrieved: 3 August 2026
Related evidence
These records share source-supplied organisations, an exact publisher byline, automatic topics or regions. The reason is shown on every link; related does not mean supporting, agreeing with or verifying this record.
FairFund-Bench: Evaluating Distributive Bias in LLM Resource Allocation
arXiv cs.CY · 3 August 2026
Ethical use of artificial intelligence in education: proposed ethical competency framework for teachers
Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence · 3 August 2026
Trustworthy AI in Digital Health: A Comprehensive Review of Robustness and Explainability
arXiv · 3 August 2026
Who Should Be Generated? Justifying Demographic Targets in Open-Ended Generation
arXiv · 3 August 2026
GoT-CD: Graph-of-Thoughts Causal Discovery and the Fragility of Post-hoc Path-Specific Fairness Audits
arXiv fairness query · 3 August 2026
AIDLC–governance indicator framework: a lifecycle-based approach to institutional AI governance
AI & Society · 4 August 2026
How to cite this record
ethics.ai (3 August 2026), “Chain-of-Models: Cross-Model Auditing for Bias-Robust LLM Judges,” evidence record 15645, https://ethics.ai/record/15645 (originally published by arXiv cs.CY).
Use and limitations
This page is a stable index and citation surface for a source record. ethics.ai did not author the underlying report and has not independently verified every claim. Automatic topics may be imperfect. For consequential use, quote and cite the original publisher.