FATHOMS-RAG: A Framework for the Assessment of Thinking and Observation in Multimodal Systems that use Retrieval Augmented Generation
Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) has emerged as a promising paradigm for improving factual accuracy in large language models (LLMs). We introduce a benchmark designed to evaluate RAG pipelines as a whole, evaluating a pipelines ability to ingest several modalities of information. We present (1) a curated dataset of 93 questions designed to evaluate a pipeline's ability to ingest textual data, tables, images, multimodal data, and cross-document multimodal data; (2) a phrase-level recall metric for correctness; (3) a nearest-neighbor embedding classifier in an attempt to classify pipeline hallucinations; (4) a comparative evaluation of 2 pipelines built with open-source retrieval mechanisms and 4 closed-source foundational models; and (5) a third-party human evaluation of the alignment of our correctness and hallucination metrics. We find that closed-source pipelines significantly outperform open-source pipelines in both the correctness and halucination metrics, with a wider performance gap in questions relying on multimodal and cross-document information. We also find after a human evaluation of our correctness and hallucination metric compared with our questions and pipeline responses, average agreement was 4.62 for correctness 4.53 for hallucination detection on a 1-5 Likert scale with 5 being strongly agree with our determination.