Loading article...
Loading article...
Stream/Area:
-
Subject:
-
Paper ID:
IJSREM68453
Volume:
10 |
10 |
Oct 2026
Pages:
1-4
Publication Frequency:
Monthly (12 issues per year)
License:International Journal of Scientific Research in Engineering and Management follows the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0) License, allowing free use and distribution with proper attribution.
Computer Science and Engineering
Jawaharlal Nehru New College Of Engineering Shimoga
Computer Science and Engineering
Jawaharlal Nehru New College Of Engineering Shimoga

Computer Science and Engineering
Jawaharlal Nehru New College Of Engineering Shimoga
Computer Science and Engineering
Jawaharlal Nehru New College Of Engineering Shimoga
Computer Science and Engineering
Jawaharlal Nehru New College Of Engineering Shimoga
Writing effective prompts for large language models (LLMs) is still mostly manual trial and error, and judging how different providers answer the same prompt usually means pasting it into several chat windows with no shared, repeatable scoring. This paper describes a full-stack platform that automates both tasks. It first scores a prompt on ten deterministic, rule-based quality dimensions. It then rewrites the prompt over a configurable number of rounds using an LLM-driven strategy, re-scoring after each round. The final prompt is sent concurrently to OpenAI, Google Gemini, Anthropic Claude and Groq, with each provider isolated so that one failure cannot block the rest. Responses are evaluated using reference-based lexical metrics (ROUGE-L, BLEU, TF-IDF cosine similarity), multi-run consistency, a latency- and token-based efficiency score, and an LLM-as-a-judge component, merged into a weighted composite score. Every experiment, including per-round history and per-provider outputs, is stored in a relational database and shown on an interactive analytics dashboard with CSV/JSON export. The backend uses FastAPI and Python, the frontend uses React and TypeScript, and an automated test suite exercises the analyzer, evaluation metrics and REST API without needing live credentials. The result is a reproducible, explainable and extensible framework for comparing prompt-engineering strategies and LLM providers on equal terms.
KEYWORDS
This paper presented the design of an AI-based prompt optimizer, evaluator and multi-LLM comparison platform. It combines a deterministic, explainable prompt-quality analyzer, a multi-round LLM-driven optimizer and concurrent, failure-isolated benchmarking across OpenAI, Google Gemini, Anthropic Claude and Groq. By scoring every response with a configurable-weight composite of reference-based lexical similarity, consistency, efficiency and LLM-as-a-judge results, and by saving every experiment for later comparison, the approach aims to replace ad hoc, unrecorded prompt trial and error with a reproducible and auditable workflow. It also provides a scalable base for future additions such as automated PDF reporting, ablation-study analysis and self-consistency majority voting in prompt-engineering tools.
[1] Y. Zhou, A. I. Muresanu, Z. Han, K. Paster, S. Pitis, H. Chan, and J. Ba, “Large language models are human-level prompt engineers,” in Proc. Int. Conf. Learning Representations (ICLR), 2023. [2] C. Yang, X. Wang, Y. Lu, H. Liu, Q. V. Le, D. Zhou, and X. Chen, “Large language models as optimizers,” in Proc. ICLR, 2024. [3] L. Zheng, W.-L. Chiang, Y. Sheng, et al., “Judging LLM-as-a-judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arena,” in Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS), vol. 36, 2023. [4] K. Papineni, S. Roukos, T. Ward, and W.-J. Zhu, “BLEU: a method for automatic evaluation of machine translation,” in Proc. 40th Annu. Meeting of the ACL, 2002, pp. 311–318. [5] C.-Y. Lin, “ROUGE: a package for automatic evaluation of summaries,” in Text Summarization Branches Out, ACL, 2004, pp. 74–81. [6] B. Romera-Paredes, M. Barekatain, A. Novikov, M. Balog, et al., “Mathematical discoveries from program search with large language models,” Nature, vol. 625, pp. 468–475, 2024, doi: 10.1038/s41586-023-06924-6. [7] F. Liu, X. Tong, M. Yuan, X. Lin, et al., “Evolution of heuristics: towards efficient automatic algorithm design using large language model,” in Proc. 41st Int. Conf. Machine Learning (ICML), 2024. [8] N. van Stein and T. Bäck, “LLaMEA: a large language model evolutionary algorithm for automatically generating metaheuristics,” IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput., 2024, doi: 10.1109/TEVC.2024.3402686. [9] X. Wu, Y. Zhong, J. Wu, F. Liu, and Q. Zhang, “AS-LLM: when algorithm selection meets large language model,” arXiv:2307.08784, 2023. [10] J. Wei, X. Wang, D. Schuurmans, M. Bosma, B. Ichter, F. Xia, E. Chi, Q. Le, and D. Zhou, “Chain-of-thought prompting elicits reasoning in large language models,” in Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, vol. 35, 2022, pp. 24824–24837.
Publication Date
10/31/2026
Peer Review Type
Double-Blind Peer Review
Review Rounds: 2
Documents
Article Views
9
Total views since publication
PDF Downloads
9
Total downloads since publication
Geographic Reach
5
Digital Preservation: This article is permanently archived on Zenodo and complies with all data preservation standards across major indexing platforms.
Plagiarism Screening
This manuscript has been checked for plagiarism using TurnitinPlagiarismChecker software.
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest related to this research work.
Funding Information
No funding information available for this research.
Related research in the same subject area
Loading similar articles...