Face4RAG: Factual Consistency Evaluation for Retrieval Augmented Generation in Chinese

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2407.01080v2
• Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2024 12:49:34 GMT
• Title: Face4RAG: Factual Consistency Evaluation for Retrieval Augmented Generation in Chinese
• Authors: Yunqi Xu, Tianchi Cai, Jiyan Jiang, Xierui Song,
• Abstract summary: The prevailing issue of factual inconsistency errors in conventional Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG) motivates the study of Factual Consistency Evaluation (FCE) We propose the first comprehensive FCE benchmark emphFace4RAG for RAG independent of the underlying Large Language Models (LLMs) On the proposed benchmark, we discover the failure of existing FCE methods to detect the logical fallacy, which refers to a mismatch of logic structures between the answer and the retrieved reference.
• Score: 3.724862061593193
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: The prevailing issue of factual inconsistency errors in conventional Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG) motivates the study of Factual Consistency Evaluation (FCE). Despite the various FCE methods proposed earlier, these methods are evaluated on datasets generated by specific Large Language Models (LLMs). Without a comprehensive benchmark, it remains unexplored how these FCE methods perform on other LLMs with different error distributions or even unseen error types, as these methods may fail to detect the error types generated by other LLMs. To fill this gap, in this paper, we propose the first comprehensive FCE benchmark \emph{Face4RAG} for RAG independent of the underlying LLM. Our benchmark consists of a synthetic dataset built upon a carefully designed typology for factuality inconsistency error and a real-world dataset constructed from six commonly used LLMs, enabling evaluation of FCE methods on specific error types or real-world error distributions. On the proposed benchmark, we discover the failure of existing FCE methods to detect the logical fallacy, which refers to a mismatch of logic structures between the answer and the retrieved reference. To fix this issue, we further propose a new method called \emph{L-Face4RAG} with two novel designs of logic-preserving answer decomposition and fact-logic FCE. Extensive experiments show L-Face4RAG substantially outperforms previous methods for factual inconsistency detection on a wide range of tasks, notably beyond the RAG task from which it is originally motivated. Both the benchmark and our proposed method are publicly available.\footnote{\url{https://huggingface.co/datasets/yq27/Face4RAG}\label{link_face4rag}}

Related papers

• Localizing Factual Inconsistencies in Attributable Text Generation [91.981439746404]
  We introduce QASemConsistency, a new formalism for localizing factual inconsistencies in attributable text generation. We first demonstrate the effectiveness of the QASemConsistency methodology for human annotation. We then implement several methods for automatically detecting localized factual inconsistencies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-09T22:53:48Z)
• DECIDER: Leveraging Foundation Model Priors for Improved Model Failure Detection and Explanation [18.77296551727931]
  We propose DECIDER, a novel approach that leverages priors from large language models (LLMs) and vision-language models (VLMs) to detect failures in image models. DECIDER consistently achieves state-of-the-art failure detection performance, significantly outperforming baselines in terms of the overall Matthews correlation coefficient.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-01T07:08:11Z)
• Detecting Errors through Ensembling Prompts (DEEP): An End-to-End LLM Framework for Detecting Factual Errors [11.07539342949602]
  We propose an end-to-end framework for detecting factual errors in text summarization. Our framework uses a diverse set of LLM prompts to identify factual inconsistencies. We calibrate the ensembled models to produce empirically accurate probabilities that a text is factually consistent or free of hallucination.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-18T18:59:37Z)
• Cycles of Thought: Measuring LLM Confidence through Stable Explanations [53.15438489398938]
  Large language models (LLMs) can reach and even surpass human-level accuracy on a variety of benchmarks, but their overconfidence in incorrect responses is still a well-documented failure mode. We propose a framework for measuring an LLM's uncertainty with respect to the distribution of generated explanations for an answer.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-05T16:35:30Z)
• Evaluating Generative Language Models in Information Extraction as Subjective Question Correction [49.729908337372436]
  We propose a new evaluation method, SQC-Score. Inspired by the principles in subjective question correction, we propose a new evaluation method, SQC-Score. Results on three information extraction tasks show that SQC-Score is more preferred by human annotators than the baseline metrics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-04T15:36:53Z)
• See, Say, and Segment: Teaching LMMs to Overcome False Premises [67.36381001664635]
  We propose a cascading and joint training approach for LMMs to solve this task. Our resulting model can "see" by detecting whether objects are present in an image, "say" by telling the user if they are not, and finally "segment" by outputting the mask of the desired objects if they exist.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-13T18:58:04Z)
• Factcheck-Bench: Fine-Grained Evaluation Benchmark for Automatic Fact-checkers [121.53749383203792]
  We present a holistic end-to-end solution for annotating the factuality of large language models (LLMs)-generated responses. We construct an open-domain document-level factuality benchmark in three-level granularity: claim, sentence and document. Preliminary experiments show that FacTool, FactScore and Perplexity are struggling to identify false claims.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-15T14:41:57Z)
• Threshold-Consistent Margin Loss for Open-World Deep Metric Learning [42.03620337000911]
  Existing losses used in deep metric learning (DML) for image retrieval often lead to highly non-uniform intra-class and inter-class representation structures. Inconsistency often complicates the threshold selection process when deploying commercial image retrieval systems. We propose a novel variance-based metric called Operating-Point-Inconsistency-Score (OPIS) that quantifies the variance in the operating characteristics across classes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-08T21:16:41Z)
• LLMs as Factual Reasoners: Insights from Existing Benchmarks and Beyond [135.8013388183257]
  We propose a new protocol for inconsistency detection benchmark creation and implement it in a 10-domain benchmark called SummEdits. Most LLMs struggle on SummEdits, with performance close to random chance. The best-performing model, GPT-4, is still 8% below estimated human performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-23T21:50:06Z)

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.