A Two-Phase Stability Study of LLM Judges and Bar Council Examiners on Thai Bar-Exam Free-Form Essays

Free-form legal essay evaluation in NLP treats expert inter-rater stability as a single ceiling number, and treats LLM-judge agreement with that ceiling as evidence of judge stability. We test both assumptions on the Thai bar examination through an identical-inputs protocol: three Bar Council-trained examiners (A, B, C) and a 26-LLM judge panel score the same 15 cross-graded answers from the same four inputs (question, official Bar Council grading regulation, gold answer, candidate answer). The headline finding is asymmetric. On 10 of 15 cells where the rubric prescribes both axes, all 29 raters converge in a tight band: panel agreement is universal. On the remaining 5 cells where the rubric does not prescribe how to grade a correct final answer that omits a decisive statutory citation, the human panel splits between two coherent readings (B/C majority at the upper rubric band, score $6$--$8$; A minority at the lower band, score $1$--$2$). The LLM judge population does not split symmetrically: 22 of 26 LLMs score in or near B/C's contested band, 3 sit in the regulation-silent middle gap, and only 1 (GPT-5.4 Nano) approaches A's band without consistently scoring within it. \emph{Zero LLMs in our 26-judge panel reproduce the minority human reading on the contested cells.} The B/C-direction cluster spans every model size, vendor, and price tier we tested. An instrumented three-LLM anchor sub-panel (Claude 4.6 Opus, Gemini 3.1 Pro, GPT-5.4 Pro) carries determinism probes, input ablations, and bootstrap CIs, and reaches anchor panel $α= 0.77$ on the 15 cells against human-panel $α= 0.36$. The high LLM-panel $α$ reflects systematic convergence on the majority reading rather than balanced reproduction of both readings; a benchmark that selects its LLM judge by maximising agreement with a human reference panel will inherit this asymmetry by construction.

Evaluating Perspectival Biases in Cross-Modal Retrieval

Multimodal retrieval systems are expected to operate in a semantic space, agnostic to the language or cultural origin of the query. In practice, however, retrieval outcomes systematically reflect perspectival biases: deviations shaped by linguistic prevalence and cultural associations. We study two such biases. First, prevalence bias refers to the tendency to favor entries from prevalent languages over semantically faithful entries in image-to-text retrieval. Second, association bias refers to the tendency to favor images culturally associated with the query over semantically correct ones in text-to-image retrieval. Results show that explicit alignment is a more effective strategy for mitigating prevalence bias. However, association bias remains a distinct and more challenging problem. These findings suggest that achieving truly equitable multimodal systems requires targeted strategies beyond simple data scaling and that bias arising from cultural association may be treated as a more challenging problem than one arising from linguistic prevalence.

Thai Wav2Vec2.0 with CommonVoice V8

Recently, Automatic Speech Recognition (ASR), a system that converts audio into text, has caught a lot of attention in the machine learning community. Thus, a lot of publicly available models were released in HuggingFace. However, most of these ASR models are available in English; only a minority of the models are available in Thai. Additionally, most of the Thai ASR models are closed-sourced, and the performance of existing open-sourced models lacks robustness. To address this problem, we train a new ASR model on a pre-trained XLSR-Wav2Vec model with the Thai CommonVoice corpus V8 and train a trigram language model to boost the performance of our ASR model. We hope that our models will be beneficial to individuals and the ASR community in Thailand.