Automated Evaluation of Retrieval-Augmented Language Models with Task-Specific Exam Generation
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.
Read the paper
Related studies
- Knowledge Management Perspective of Generative Artificial Intelligence
- Navigating Generative Artificial Intelligence Promises and Perils for Knowledge and Creative Work
- Characterizing the evolving research on enterprise content management
- Large language models and multimodal foundation models for precision oncology
- From Generative AI to Extended Reality: Multidisciplinary Perspectives on the Challenges, Opportunities, and Future of Educational Computing
- Generative Artificial Intelligence: A New Engine for Advancing Environmental Science and Engineering
Go deeper in Evidence Hub
Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.