Instance-Optimal Estimation with Multiple LLM Judges on a Budget

Evaluating large language models increasingly relies on LLM-as-a-judge protocols, but such evaluations remain costly: different judges have different prices and reliabilities, and the difficulty of each prompt–response pair can vary substantially. This raises a basic allocation question: under a fixed budget, how should one distribute evaluation queries across heterogeneous judges and instances to obtain the most accurate score estimates? We formalize this question as budgeted heteroskedastic multi-judge estimation. Given $K$ prompt–response pairs, $J$ judges with known costs, and unknown query–judge variances, the goal is to estimate a bounded score vector while minimizing an ${\ell }_p$-error. Our first contribution is to analyze the inverse-variance weighted estimator (IVWE) and to derive the oracle allocation that minimizes its error rate. Since this allocation depends on the unknown variances, we then address the practical unknown-variance setting by proposing Est-IVWE, an adaptive algorithm that constructs and leverages *optimistically biased* variance estimates to stabilize the empirical allocation. We prove that Est-IVWE matches the oracle IVWE rate up to lower-order terms in the budget. Our second and central theoretical contribution is a matching *local* minimax lower bound, which establishes the instance-optimality of the proposed algorithms. A key technical insight is that Fano-type high-probability arguments are too coarse for this problem: their packing construction loses the local variance structure that governs the optimal allocation. We instead use an Assouad-type in-expectation argument, based on local perturbations, which preserves this structure and yields the sharp allocation-dependent lower bound. Finally, we validate our adaptive approach on synthetic benchmarks and the real-world HelpSteer2 dataset, demonstrating significant gains over naive uniform allocation strategies.