REVIEW 4 cited by
CRUD-RAG: A Comprehensive Chinese Benchmark for Retrieval-Augmented Generation of Large Language Models
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
read the original abstract
Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) is a technique that enhances the capabilities of large language models (LLMs) by incorporating external knowledge sources. This method addresses common LLM limitations, including outdated information and the tendency to produce inaccurate "hallucinated" content. However, the evaluation of RAG systems is challenging, as existing benchmarks are limited in scope and diversity. Most of the current benchmarks predominantly assess question-answering applications, overlooking the broader spectrum of situations where RAG could prove advantageous. Moreover, they only evaluate the performance of the LLM component of the RAG pipeline in the experiments, and neglect the influence of the retrieval component and the external knowledge database. To address these issues, this paper constructs a large-scale and more comprehensive benchmark, and evaluates all the components of RAG systems in various RAG application scenarios. Specifically, we have categorized the range of RAG applications into four distinct types-Create, Read, Update, and Delete (CRUD), each representing a unique use case. "Create" refers to scenarios requiring the generation of original, varied content. "Read" involves responding to intricate questions in knowledge-intensive situations. "Update" focuses on revising and rectifying inaccuracies or inconsistencies in pre-existing texts. "Delete" pertains to the task of summarizing extensive texts into more concise forms. For each of these CRUD categories, we have developed comprehensive datasets to evaluate the performance of RAG systems. We also analyze the effects of various components of the RAG system, such as the retriever, the context length, the knowledge base construction, and the LLM. Finally, we provide useful insights for optimizing the RAG technology for different scenarios.
Forward citations
Cited by 4 Pith papers
-
InfoDeepSeek: Benchmarking Agentic Information Seeking for Retrieval-Augmented Generation
InfoDeepSeek is a 245-question benchmark that measures how well AI agents seek information on the live web, with new metrics for answer accuracy, evidence quality, and compactness.
-
LaRA: Benchmarking Retrieval-Augmented Generation and Long-Context LLMs -- No Silver Bullet for LC or RAG Routing
LaRA shows that RAG versus long-context performance depends on model size, context length, task, and chunk settings, with no universal winner.
-
Diverse And Private Synthetic Datasets Generation for RAG evaluation: A multi-agent framework
A multi-agent LLM framework generates synthetic QA datasets for RAG evaluation by combining clustering-based sampling, PII pseudonymization, and QA curation, with reported diversity gains and 0.75-0.90 masking accuracy.
-
CCRS: A Zero-Shot LLM-as-a-Judge Framework for Comprehensive RAG Evaluation
CCRS is a zero-shot LLM-as-a-judge framework whose five metrics discriminate between RAG systems on BioASQ with comparable or better power than RAGChecker at lower compute.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.