Worse than Zero-shot? A Fact-Checking Dataset for Evaluating the Robustness of RAG Against Misleading Retrievals

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2502.16101v1
• Date: Sat, 22 Feb 2025 05:50:15 GMT
• Title: Worse than Zero-shot? A Fact-Checking Dataset for Evaluating the Robustness of RAG Against Misleading Retrievals
• Authors: Linda Zeng, Rithwik Gupta, Divij Motwani, Diji Yang, Yi Zhang,
• Abstract summary: We introduce RAGuard, a fact-checking dataset designed to evaluate the robustness of RAG systems against misleading retrievals.<n> RAGuard categorizes retrieved evidence into three types: supporting, misleading, and irrelevant.<n>Our benchmark experiments reveal that when exposed to misleading retrievals, all tested LLM-powered RAG systems perform worse than their zero-shot baselines.
• Score: 3.9139847342664864
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) has shown impressive capabilities in mitigating hallucinations in large language models (LLMs). However, LLMs struggle to handle misleading retrievals and often fail to maintain their own reasoning when exposed to conflicting or selectively-framed evidence, making them vulnerable to real-world misinformation. In such real-world retrieval scenarios, misleading and conflicting information is rampant, particularly in the political domain, where evidence is often selectively framed, incomplete, or polarized. However, existing RAG benchmarks largely assume a clean retrieval setting, where models succeed by accurately retrieving and generating answers from gold-standard documents. This assumption fails to align with real-world conditions, leading to an overestimation of RAG system performance. To bridge this gap, we introduce RAGuard, a fact-checking dataset designed to evaluate the robustness of RAG systems against misleading retrievals. Unlike prior benchmarks that rely on synthetic noise, our dataset constructs its retrieval corpus from Reddit discussions, capturing naturally occurring misinformation. It categorizes retrieved evidence into three types: supporting, misleading, and irrelevant, providing a realistic and challenging testbed for assessing how well RAG systems navigate different retrieval information. Our benchmark experiments reveal that when exposed to misleading retrievals, all tested LLM-powered RAG systems perform worse than their zero-shot baselines (i.e., no retrieval at all), highlighting their susceptibility to noisy environments. To the best of our knowledge, RAGuard is the first benchmark to systematically assess RAG robustness against misleading evidence. We expect this benchmark will drive future research toward improving RAG systems beyond idealized datasets, making them more reliable for real-world applications.

Related papers

• Towards More Robust Retrieval-Augmented Generation: Evaluating RAG Under Adversarial Poisoning Attacks [45.07581174558107]
  Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) systems have emerged as a promising solution to mitigate hallucinations. RAG systems are vulnerable to adversarial poisoning attacks, where malicious passages injected into retrieval databases can mislead the model into generating factually incorrect outputs. This paper investigates both the retrieval and the generation components of RAG systems to understand how to enhance their robustness against such attacks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-21T17:31:52Z)
• Unanswerability Evaluation for Retrieval Augmented Generation [74.3022365715597]
  UAEval4RAG is a framework designed to evaluate whether RAG systems can handle unanswerable queries effectively.<n>We define a taxonomy with six unanswerable categories, and UAEval4RAG automatically synthesizes diverse and challenging queries.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-16T19:11:55Z)
• ChunkRAG: Novel LLM-Chunk Filtering Method for RAG Systems [2.8692611791027893]
  Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) systems generate inaccurate responses due to the retrieval of irrelevant or loosely related information. We propose ChunkRAG, a framework that enhances RAG systems by evaluating and filtering retrieved information at the chunk level.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-25T14:07:53Z)
• Toward Robust RALMs: Revealing the Impact of Imperfect Retrieval on Retrieval-Augmented Language Models [5.10832476049103]
  We identify three common scenarios-unanswerable, adversarial, conflicting-where retrieved document sets can confuse RALM with plausible real-world examples. We propose a new adversarial attack method, Generative model-based ADVersarial attack (GenADV) and a novel metric Robustness under Additional Document (RAD) Our findings reveal that RALMs often fail to identify the unanswerability or contradiction of a document set, which frequently leads to hallucinations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-19T13:40:33Z)
• Controlling Risk of Retrieval-augmented Generation: A Counterfactual Prompting Framework [77.45983464131977]
  We focus on how likely it is that a RAG model's prediction is incorrect, resulting in uncontrollable risks in real-world applications. Our research identifies two critical latent factors affecting RAG's confidence in its predictions. We develop a counterfactual prompting framework that induces the models to alter these factors and analyzes the effect on their answers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-24T14:52:14Z)
• On the Vulnerability of Applying Retrieval-Augmented Generation within Knowledge-Intensive Application Domains [34.122040172188406]
  Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) has been empirically shown to enhance the performance of large language models (LLMs) in knowledge-intensive domains. We show that RAG is vulnerable to universal poisoning attacks in medical Q&A. We develop a new detection-based defense to ensure the safe use of RAG.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-12T02:43:40Z)
• 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)
• 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)
• Benchmarking Large Language Models in Retrieval-Augmented Generation [53.504471079548]
  We systematically investigate the impact of Retrieval-Augmented Generation on large language models. We analyze the performance of different large language models in 4 fundamental abilities required for RAG. We establish Retrieval-Augmented Generation Benchmark (RGB), a new corpus for RAG evaluation in both English and Chinese.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-04T08:28:44Z)

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.