Any Large Language Model Can Be a Reliable Judge: Debiasing with a Reasoning-based Bias Detector

Jun Ma (GE HealthCare) · Haoyan Yang (State University of New York at Stony Brook) · Runxue Bao (University of Pittsburgh) · Cao (Danica) Xiao (GE Healthcare) · Parminder Bhatia (Amazon) · Shangqian Gao (Florida State University) · Taha Kass-Hout (GE HealthCare)
bias detectionbiased dataset constructionclosed-source modelsdistilled reasoningevaluation accuracyfeedback-driven revisionfine-tuninggeneralization across biasesin-context learningllm-as-a-judgeperformance improvementsreasoning-based bias detectorself-correctionstructured reasoningsupervision collection

LLM-as-a-Judge has emerged as a promising tool for automatically evaluating generated outputs, but its reliability is often undermined by potential biases in judgment. Existing efforts to mitigate these biases face key limitations: in-context learning-based methods fail to address rooted biases due to the evaluator’s limited capacity for self-reflection, whereas fine-tuning is not applicable to all evaluator types, especially closed-source models. To address this challenge, we introduce the **R**easoning-based **B**ias **D**etector (RBD), which is a plug-in module that identifies biased evaluations and generates structured reasoning to guide evaluator self-correction. Rather than modifying the evaluator itself, RBD operates externally and engages in an iterative process of bias detection and feedback-driven revision. To support its development, we design a complete pipeline consisting of biased dataset construction, supervision collection, distilled reasoning-based fine-tuning of RBD, and integration with LLM evaluators. We fine-tune four sizes of RBD models, ranging from 1.5B to 14B, and observe consistent performance improvements across all scales. Experimental results on 4 bias types—verbosity, position, bandwagon, and sentiment—evaluated using 8 LLM evaluators demonstrate RBD’s strong effectiveness. For example, the RBD-8B model improves evaluation accuracy by an average of 18.5% and consistency by 10.9%, and surpasses prompting-based baselines and fine-tuned judges by 12.8% and 17.2%, respectively. These results highlight RBD’s effectiveness and scalability. Additional experiments further demonstrate its strong generalization across biases and domains, as well as its efficiency.