Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 cited by

Evaluation of RAG Metrics for Question Answering in the Telecom Domain

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 2407.12873 v1 pith:P7D7XIJN submitted 2024-07-15 cs.CL cs.AIcs.IRcs.LG

classification cs.CLcs.AIcs.IRcs.LG
keywords metricsanswerchallengesdomainevaluationllmsragasretrieval
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG) is widely used to enable Large Language Models (LLMs) perform Question Answering (QA) tasks in various domains. However, RAG based on open-source LLM for specialized domains has challenges of evaluating generated responses. A popular framework in the literature is the RAG Assessment (RAGAS), a publicly available library which uses LLMs for evaluation. One disadvantage of RAGAS is the lack of details of derivation of numerical value of the evaluation metrics. One of the outcomes of this work is a modified version of this package for few metrics (faithfulness, context relevance, answer relevance, answer correctness, answer similarity and factual correctness) through which we provide the intermediate outputs of the prompts by using any LLMs. Next, we analyse the expert evaluations of the output of the modified RAGAS package and observe the challenges of using it in the telecom domain. We also study the effect of the metrics under correct vs. wrong retrieval and observe that few of the metrics have higher values for correct retrieval. We also study for differences in metrics between base embeddings and those domain adapted via pre-training and fine-tuning. Finally, we comment on the suitability and challenges of using these metrics for in-the-wild telecom QA task.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. DeepTRACE: Auditing Deep Research AI Systems for Tracking Reliability Across Citations and Evidence

    cs.CL 2025-09 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    An audit framework and empirical study showing that generative search engines and deep research agents frequently produce one-sided answers and weakly supported citations, with citation accuracy between 40 and 80%.

  2. BR-TaxQA-R: A Dataset for Question Answering with References for Brazilian Personal Income Tax Law, including case law

    cs.CL 2025-05 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    BR-TaxQA-R: a 715-question Brazilian personal income tax QA dataset with statutory and case-law references, plus a RAG baseline that beats commercial chatbots on response relevancy but not on factual correctness.

  3. UrbanMind: Towards Urban General Intelligence via Tool-Enhanced Retrieval-Augmented Generation and Multilevel Optimization

    cs.LG 2025-07 reject novelty 4.0 of 10

    The paper introduces UrbanMind, a tool-enhanced RAG framework with a multilevel optimization formulation for continual adaptation in urban AI, but offers only qualitative prototype results.

  4. Benchmarking Vector, Graph and Hybrid Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG) Pipelines for Open Radio Access Networks (ORAN)

    cs.AI 2025-07 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    On a 600-question subset of ORAN-Bench-13K, GraphRAG and Hybrid GraphRAG beat plain vector RAG on factual accuracy, but Hybrid GraphRAG scored below vector RAG on context relevance.

Pith tools