Initial Nugget Evaluation Results for the TREC 2024 RAG Track with the AutoNuggetizer Framework

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2411.09607v1
• Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2024 17:25:43 GMT
• Title: Initial Nugget Evaluation Results for the TREC 2024 RAG Track with the AutoNuggetizer Framework
• Authors: Ronak Pradeep, Nandan Thakur, Shivani Upadhyay, Daniel Campos, Nick Craswell, Jimmy Lin,
• Abstract summary: This report provides an initial look at partial results from the TREC 2024 Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) Track. We have identified RAG evaluation as a barrier to continued progress in information access.
• Score: 53.12387628636912
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: This report provides an initial look at partial results from the TREC 2024 Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) Track. We have identified RAG evaluation as a barrier to continued progress in information access (and more broadly, natural language processing and artificial intelligence), and it is our hope that we can contribute to tackling the many challenges in this space. The central hypothesis we explore in this work is that the nugget evaluation methodology, originally developed for the TREC Question Answering Track in 2003, provides a solid foundation for evaluating RAG systems. As such, our efforts have focused on "refactoring" this methodology, specifically applying large language models to both automatically create nuggets and to automatically assign nuggets to system answers. We call this the AutoNuggetizer framework. Within the TREC setup, we are able to calibrate our fully automatic process against a manual process whereby nuggets are created by human assessors semi-manually and then assigned manually to system answers. Based on initial results across 21 topics from 45 runs, we observe a strong correlation between scores derived from a fully automatic nugget evaluation and a (mostly) manual nugget evaluation by human assessors. This suggests that our fully automatic evaluation process can be used to guide future iterations of RAG systems.

Related papers

• The Great Nugget Recall: Automating Fact Extraction and RAG Evaluation with Large Language Models [53.12387628636912]
  We propose an automatic evaluation framework that is validated against human annotations. This approach was originally developed for the TREC Question Answering (QA) Track in 2003. We observe strong agreement at the run level between scores derived from fully automatic nugget evaluation and human-based variants.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-21T12:55:06Z)
• Conversational Gold: Evaluating Personalized Conversational Search System using Gold Nuggets [8.734527090842139]
  We introduce a new resource for assessing the retrieval effectiveness and relevance of response generated by RAG systems. Our dataset extends to the TREC iKAT 2024 collection, which includes 17 conversations and 20,575 relevance passage assessments.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-12T23:44:10Z)
• Chain-of-Retrieval Augmented Generation [72.06205327186069]
  This paper introduces an approach for training o1-like RAG models that retrieve and reason over relevant information step by step before generating the final answer. Our proposed method, CoRAG, allows the model to dynamically reformulate the query based on the evolving state.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-24T09:12:52Z)
• A Large-Scale Study of Relevance Assessments with Large Language Models: An Initial Look [52.114284476700874]
  This paper reports on the results of a large-scale evaluation (the TREC 2024 RAG Track) where four different relevance assessment approaches were deployed. We find that automatically generated UMBRELA judgments can replace fully manual judgments to accurately capture run-level effectiveness. Surprisingly, we find that LLM assistance does not appear to increase correlation with fully manual assessments, suggesting that costs associated with human-in-the-loop processes do not bring obvious tangible benefits.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-13T01:12:35Z)
• 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)
• ASAG2024: A Combined Benchmark for Short Answer Grading [0.10826342457160269]
  Short Answer Grading (SAG) systems aim to automatically score students' answers. There exists no comprehensive short-answer grading benchmark across different subjects, grading scales, and distributions. We introduce the combined ASAG2024 benchmark to facilitate the comparison of automated grading systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-27T09:56:02Z)
• 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)
• Evaluating the IWSLT2023 Speech Translation Tasks: Human Annotations, Automatic Metrics, and Segmentation [50.60733773088296]
  We conduct a comprehensive human evaluation of the results of several shared tasks from the last International Workshop on Spoken Language Translation (IWSLT 2023) We propose an effective evaluation strategy based on automatic resegmentation and direct assessment with segment context. Our analysis revealed that: 1) the proposed evaluation strategy is robust and scores well-correlated with other types of human judgements; 2) automatic metrics are usually, but not always, well-correlated with direct assessment scores; and 3) COMET as a slightly stronger automatic metric than chrF.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-06T09:18:42Z)
• Towards a Search Engine for Machines: Unified Ranking for Multiple Retrieval-Augmented Large Language Models [21.115495457454365]
  uRAG is a framework with a unified retrieval engine that serves multiple downstream retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) systems. We build a large-scale experimentation ecosystem consisting of 18 RAG systems that engage in training and 18 unknown RAG systems that use the uRAG as the new users of the search engine.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-30T19:51:37Z)
• Sequencing Matters: A Generate-Retrieve-Generate Model for Building Conversational Agents [9.191944519634111]
  The Georgetown InfoSense group has done in regard to solving the challenges presented by TREC iKAT 2023. Our submitted runs outperform the median runs by a significant margin, exhibiting superior performance in nDCG across various cut numbers and in overall success rate. Our solution involves the use of Large Language Models (LLMs) for initial answers, answer grounding by BM25, passage quality filtering by logistic regression, and answer generation by LLMs again.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-16T02:37:58Z)
• ARES: An Automated Evaluation Framework for Retrieval-Augmented Generation Systems [46.522527144802076]
  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.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-16T00:39:39Z)
• Get It Scored Using AutoSAS -- An Automated System for Scoring Short Answers [63.835172924290326]
  We present a fast, scalable, and accurate approach towards automated Short Answer Scoring (SAS) We propose and explain the design and development of a system for SAS, namely AutoSAS. AutoSAS shows state-of-the-art performance and achieves better results by over 8% in some of the question prompts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-12-21T10:47:30Z)

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.