LLM evaluation by domain experts

SoReliable AI evaluates large language model outputs with experts from your field, against a rubric built from your own quality bar.

You get item-by-item scores, the reason behind each one, and agreement measures that show how far the results can be trusted.

The problem

Fluent is not the same as correct

Language models write convincingly, so their mistakes are easy to miss. A smooth answer can leave out the one fact that matters or state something confidently that is wrong.

An evaluation is only as good as its rubric and the people applying it. Vague criteria and general raters give you numbers that move, without telling you why.

What we provide

What you get with SoReliable AI

  • Rubric design

    We turn your quality bar into criteria that are specific, observable and applied the same way by every reviewer.
  • Expert scoring

    Specialists from your field score each output against every criterion and explain their judgment.
  • Side-by-side comparisons

    Compare model versions or prompts on the same cases, judged by the same calibrated experts.
  • Agreement and calibration

    We measure agreement between reviewers and against verified answers, and recalibrate when it slips.
  • Edge-case catalogs

    Every failure we find is written up as a reusable test case, so your evaluation set grows with your model.

An example

A contract summary that read perfectly

A model summarizes a services agreement for a busy manager.

AI modelRated 5 of 5Needs correction

Contract summary

Parties
Supplier and client
Term
12 months, renews yearly
Ending it
Either party, at any time
Expert review: The contract requires 60 days' written notice to end it.
  • What the checks saw: The summary is clear, well structured and rated highly by a general reviewer.
  • What the expert caught: A lawyer notices it says either party may end the contract at any time. The contract requires 60 days' written notice.

The rubric asked whether key obligations were stated correctly. Only someone who reads contracts for a living could check that.

Illustrative example.

How it works

We prove capability before production

  1. 1

    Define what good looks like

    We work with your team to write the rubric, including the hard and ambiguous cases.

  2. 2

    Calibrate the experts

    Experts score shared examples until they apply the rubric the same way.

  3. 3

    Prove it on known answers

    Each expert is tested on cases with verified answers before scoring your data.

  4. 4

    Evaluate and report

    You get scores, rationales, agreement measures and the failures worth fixing first.

See our full method

Deliverables

What you receive

  • A rubric you own
  • Scores for every output and criterion
  • A written rationale for each judgment
  • Agreement and calibration measures
  • A ranked list of failure patterns
  • New test cases from every failure found

Your rubrics, data, scores and rationales stay yours.

Questions

Questions teams ask

What is LLM evaluation?

Checking a language model's outputs against a clear standard to find out how often it is right, where it fails and whether a change made it better. Expert evaluation means the people judging know the subject.

Can you build the rubric with us?

Yes. Most engagements start there. We turn your quality bar into criteria experts can apply the same way, and you keep the rubric.

How do you know the scores are reliable?

We measure how often reviewers agree with each other and with verified answers. When agreement drops, we recalibrate before scoring continues.

Do you replace automated evaluation?

No. Automated checks are fast and useful. Expert evaluation checks what they cannot, and helps you tell whether your automated judges can be trusted.

Ready to try SoReliable?

Tell us what you are building. Any team, any project, any size. We find the specialists, train them on your standard, and evaluate the work against what your project actually needs.

Your enquiry gets a personal reply from SoReliable AI, not an autoresponder.