The Necessity of Setting Temperature in LLM-as-a-Judge

arXiv cs.CL / 3/31/2026

💬 OpinionIdeas & Deep AnalysisModels & Research

Key Points

  • The paper evaluates the widely used practice of setting a fixed temperature in LLM-as-a-Judge, noting that the current convention (often 0.1 or 1.0) is largely empirical rather than theoretically grounded.
  • It argues that judge performance can be materially affected by temperature and that lower temperature does not consistently produce better results, with strong dependence on the specific task.
  • The authors run controlled experiments to systematically quantify how temperature relates to judge performance in LLM-centric evaluation.
  • They further apply a causal inference framework to estimate the direct causal effect of temperature on judge behavior, aiming for more rigorous conclusions than correlation-based studies.
  • The work provides engineering takeaways for designing LLM-as-a-judge evaluation pipelines that account for temperature sensitivity.

Abstract

LLM-as-a-Judge has emerged as an effective and low-cost paradigm for evaluating text quality and factual correctness. Prior studies have shown substantial agreement between LLM judges and human experts, even on tasks that are difficult to assess automatically. In practice, researchers commonly employ fixed temperature configurations during the evaluation process-with values of 0.1 and 1.0 being the most prevalent choices-a convention that is largely empirical rather than principled. However, recent researches suggest that LLM performance exhibits non-trivial sensitivity to temperature settings, that lower temperatures do not universally yield optimal outcomes, and that such effects are highly task-dependent. This raises a critical research question: does temperature influence judge performance in LLM centric evaluation? To address this, we systematically investigate the relationship between temperature and judge performance through a series of controlled experiments, and further adopt a causal inference framework within our empirical statistical analysis to rigorously examine the direct causal effect of temperature on judge behavior, offering actionable engineering insights for the design of LLM-centric evaluation pipelines.