Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

Evaluating RAG-Fusion with RAGElo: an Automated Elo-based Framework

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2406.14783 v2 pith:XL6JKUIW submitted 2024-06-20 cs.IR cs.CL

classification cs.IRcs.CL
keywords ragfanswersrageloautomatedevaluationexpertqueriesannotations
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Challenges in the automated evaluation of Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) Question-Answering (QA) systems include hallucination problems in domain-specific knowledge and the lack of gold standard benchmarks for company internal tasks. This results in difficulties in evaluating RAG variations, like RAG-Fusion (RAGF), in the context of a product QA task at Infineon Technologies. To solve these problems, we propose a comprehensive evaluation framework, which leverages Large Language Models (LLMs) to generate large datasets of synthetic queries based on real user queries and in-domain documents, uses LLM-as-a-judge to rate retrieved documents and answers, evaluates the quality of answers, and ranks different variants of Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) agents with RAGElo's automated Elo-based competition. LLM-as-a-judge rating of a random sample of synthetic queries shows a moderate, positive correlation with domain expert scoring in relevance, accuracy, completeness, and precision. While RAGF outperformed RAG in Elo score, a significance analysis against expert annotations also shows that RAGF significantly outperforms RAG in completeness, but underperforms in precision. In addition, Infineon's RAGF assistant demonstrated slightly higher performance in document relevance based on MRR@5 scores. We find that RAGElo positively aligns with the preferences of human annotators, though due caution is still required. Finally, RAGF's approach leads to more complete answers based on expert annotations and better answers overall based on RAGElo's evaluation criteria.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. OpenAlex reports about 4 citations worldwide. Full citation record

  1. VoxRAG: A Step Toward Transcription-Free RAG Systems in Spoken Question Answering

    cs.IR 2025-05 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    VoxRAG shows that a spoken query can retrieve topically relevant podcast segments via CLAP audio embeddings and FAISS search, with Recall@10 of 0.60 for somewhat relevant segments, though precise answers remain rare.

  2. HF-RAG: Hierarchical Fusion-based RAG with Multiple Sources and Rankers

    cs.IR 2025-09 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    By first fusing multiple retrievers within labeled and unlabeled sources with RRF, then merging z-score normalized lists, HF-RAG improves fact-verification F1 in-domain and out-of-domain.

Pith tools