arXiv:2604.01473v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) are powerful tools for answering user queries, yet they remain highly vulnerable to jailbreak attacks. Existing guardrail methods typically rely on internal features or textual responses to detect malicious queries, which either introduce substantial latency or suffer from the randomness in text generation. To overcome these limitations, we propose SelfGrader, a lightweight guardrail method that formulates jailbreak detection as a numerical grading problem using token-level logits. Specifically, SelfGrader evaluates the safety of a user query within a compact set of numerical tokens (NTs) (e.g., 0-9) and interprets their logit distribution as an internal safety signal. To align these signals with human intuition of maliciousness, SelfGrader introduces a dual-perspective scoring rule that considers both the maliciousness and benignness of the query, yielding a stable and interpretable score that reflects harmfulness and reduces the false positive rate simultaneously. Extensive experiments across diverse jailbreak benchmarks, multiple LLMs, and state-of-the-art guardrail baselines demonstrate that SelfGrader achieves up to a 22.66% reduction in ASR on LLaMA-3-8B, while maintaining significantly lower memory overhead (up to 173x) and latency (up to 26x).

arXiv:2510.18560v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: The paradigm of LLM-as-a-judge is emerging as a scalable and efficient alternative to human evaluation, demonstrating strong performance on well-defined tasks. However, its reliability in open-ended tasks with dynamic environments and complex interactions remains unexplored. To bridge the gap, we introduce WebDevJudge, a systematic benchmark for assessing LLM-as-a-judge performance in web development, with support for both non-interactive evaluation based on static observations and continuous interactive evaluation with a dynamic web environment. WebDevJudge comprises human preference labels over paired web implementations, annotated with structured and query-grounded rubrics to ensure high-quality ground truth. Using this benchmark, we comprehensively evaluate various evaluators, including LLMs, MLLMs, and agentic workflows. We systematically investigate the impact of different paradigms and guidance mechanisms. Our experiments reveal a significant gap between LLM judges and human experts. In-depth analysis indicates this gap stems from fundamental model limitations, including failures in recognizing functional equivalence, verifying task feasibility, and mitigating bias. Overall, WebDevJudge presents a challenge to LLM-as-a-judge, offering insights to guide future research toward developing more reliable and capable automated evaluators for complicated scenarios. Code and data are available at https://github.com/lcy2723/WebDevJudge.