Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 cited by

Automated Evaluation of Retrieval-Augmented Language Models with Task-Specific Exam Generation

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 2405.13622 v1 pith:XPUE2RQT submitted 2024-05-22 cs.CL cs.IR

classification cs.CLcs.IR
keywords examlanguagequestionstask-specificaccuracyautomatedevaluationmethod
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

We propose a new method to measure the task-specific accuracy of Retrieval-Augmented Large Language Models (RAG). Evaluation is performed by scoring the RAG on an automatically-generated synthetic exam composed of multiple choice questions based on the corpus of documents associated with the task. Our method is an automated, cost-efficient, interpretable, and robust strategy to select the optimal components for a RAG system. We leverage Item Response Theory (IRT) to estimate the quality of an exam and its informativeness on task-specific accuracy. IRT also provides a natural way to iteratively improve the exam by eliminating the exam questions that are not sufficiently informative about a model's ability. We demonstrate our approach on four new open-ended Question-Answering tasks based on Arxiv abstracts, StackExchange questions, AWS DevOps troubleshooting guides, and SEC filings. In addition, our experiments reveal more general insights into factors impacting RAG performance like size, retrieval mechanism, prompting and fine-tuning. Most notably, our findings show that choosing the right retrieval algorithms often leads to bigger performance gains than simply using a larger language model.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

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

  1. GaRAGe: A Benchmark with Grounding Annotations for RAG Evaluation

    cs.CL 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    GaRAGe provides a fine-grained RAG benchmark showing state-of-the-art LLMs ground answers on relevant passages at most 60% of the time and rarely deflect when grounding is insufficient.

  2. IRT-Router: Effective and Interpretable Multi-LLM Routing via Item Response Theory

    cs.AI 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    An IRT-based router that models each LLM's latent ability and each query's difficulty outperforms RouterBench on cost-performance reward across ID and OOD benchmarks.

  3. Can LLMs Be Trusted for Evaluating RAG Systems? A Survey of Methods and Datasets

    cs.IR 2025-04 conditional novelty 3.0 of 10

    A systematic review of 63 RAG evaluation papers concludes that LLM-based automation is feasible across dataset generation, retrieval scoring, and answer evaluation, but only six studies directly compare LLM judges wit...

Pith tools