ARES: An Automated Evaluation Framework for Retrieval-Augmented Generation Systems
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2311.09476v2
- Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2024 20:58:46 GMT
- Title: ARES: An Automated Evaluation Framework for Retrieval-Augmented Generation Systems
- Authors: Jon Saad-Falcon, Omar Khattab, Christopher Potts, Matei Zaharia,
- Abstract summary: We introduce ARES, an Automated RAG Evaluation System, for evaluating RAG systems.
ARES finetunes lightweight LM judges to assess the quality of individual RAG components.
We make our code and datasets publicly available on Github.
- Score: 46.522527144802076
- License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
- Abstract: Evaluating retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) systems traditionally relies on hand annotations for input queries, passages to retrieve, and responses to generate. We introduce ARES, an Automated RAG Evaluation System, for evaluating RAG systems along the dimensions of context relevance, answer faithfulness, and answer relevance. By creating its own synthetic training data, ARES finetunes lightweight LM judges to assess the quality of individual RAG components. To mitigate potential prediction errors, ARES utilizes a small set of human-annotated datapoints for prediction-powered inference (PPI). Across eight different knowledge-intensive tasks in KILT, SuperGLUE, and AIS, ARES accurately evaluates RAG systems while using only a few hundred human annotations during evaluation. Furthermore, ARES judges remain effective across domain shifts, proving accurate even after changing the type of queries and/or documents used in the evaluated RAG systems. We make our code and datasets publicly available on Github.
Related papers
- Do RAG Systems Cover What Matters? Evaluating and Optimizing Responses with Sub-Question Coverage [74.70255719194819]
We introduce a novel framework based on sub-question coverage, which measures how well a RAG system addresses different facets of a question.
We use this framework to evaluate three commercial generative answer engines: You.com, Perplexity AI, and Bing Chat.
We find that while all answer engines cover core sub-questions more often than background or follow-up ones, they still miss around 50% of core sub-questions.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-10-20T22:59:34Z) - Towards Fair RAG: On the Impact of Fair Ranking in Retrieval-Augmented Generation [53.285436927963865]
This paper presents the first systematic evaluation of RAG systems integrated with fair rankings.
We focus specifically on measuring the fair exposure of each relevant item across the rankings utilized by RAG systems.
Our findings indicate that RAG systems with fair rankings can maintain a high level of generation quality and, in many cases, even outperform traditional RAG systems.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-09-17T23:10:04Z) - RAGChecker: A Fine-grained Framework for Diagnosing Retrieval-Augmented Generation [61.14660526363607]
We propose a fine-grained evaluation framework, RAGChecker, that incorporates a suite of diagnostic metrics for both the retrieval and generation modules.
RAGChecker has significantly better correlations with human judgments than other evaluation metrics.
The metrics of RAGChecker can guide researchers and practitioners in developing more effective RAG systems.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-08-15T10:20:54Z) - RAGEval: Scenario Specific RAG Evaluation Dataset Generation Framework [69.4501863547618]
This paper introduces RAGEval, a framework designed to assess RAG systems across diverse scenarios.
With a focus on factual accuracy, we propose three novel metrics Completeness, Hallucination, and Irrelevance.
Experimental results show that RAGEval outperforms zero-shot and one-shot methods in terms of clarity, safety, conformity, and richness of generated samples.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-08-02T13:35:11Z) - RAGBench: Explainable Benchmark for Retrieval-Augmented Generation Systems [0.0]
Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) has become a standard architectural pattern for domain-specific knowledge into user-facing chat applications.
We introduce RAGBench: the first comprehensive, large-scale RAG benchmark dataset of 100k examples.
We formalize the TRACe evaluation framework: a set of explainable and actionable RAG evaluation metrics applicable across all RAG domains.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-06-25T20:23:15Z) - Evaluating RAG-Fusion with RAGElo: an Automated Elo-based Framework [0.5897092980823265]
We propose a comprehensive framework to evaluate Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) Question-Answering systems.
We use Large Language Models (LLMs) to generate large datasets of synthetic queries based on real user queries and in-domain documents.
We find that RAGElo positively aligns with the preferences of human annotators, though due caution is still required.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-06-20T23:20:34Z) - Evaluation of Retrieval-Augmented Generation: A Survey [13.633909177683462]
We provide a comprehensive overview of the evaluation and benchmarks of Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) systems.
Specifically, we examine and compare several quantifiable metrics of the Retrieval and Generation components, such as relevance, accuracy, and faithfulness.
We then analyze the various datasets and metrics, discuss the limitations of current benchmarks, and suggest potential directions to advance the field of RAG benchmarks.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-05-13T02:33:25Z) - Evaluating Retrieval Quality in Retrieval-Augmented Generation [21.115495457454365]
Traditional end-to-end evaluation methods are computationally expensive.
We propose eRAG, where each document in the retrieval list is individually utilized by the large language model within the RAG system.
eRAG offers significant computational advantages, improving runtime and consuming up to 50 times less GPU memory than end-to-end evaluation.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-04-21T21:22:28Z) - CRUD-RAG: A Comprehensive Chinese Benchmark for Retrieval-Augmented Generation of Large Language Models [49.16989035566899]
Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) is a technique that enhances the capabilities of large language models (LLMs) by incorporating external knowledge sources.
This paper constructs a large-scale and more comprehensive benchmark, and evaluates all the components of RAG systems in various RAG application scenarios.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-01-30T14:25:32Z)
This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.
This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.