mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

RAG-Check: Evaluating Multimodal Retrieval Augmented Generation Performance

arXiv 2501.03995 ↗First posted 7 Jan 2025cs.LG cs.CV cs.IRcited by 10

On the map: Multimodal LLMs / vision-language models → Document understanding and multimodal RAG

also in 1 more
Abstract (arXiv)

Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) improves large language models (LLMs) by using external knowledge to guide response generation, reducing hallucinations. However, RAG, particularly multi-modal RAG, can introduce new hallucination sources: (i) the retrieval process may select irrelevant pieces (e.g., documents, images) as raw context from the database, and (ii) retrieved images are processed into text-based context via vision-language models (VLMs) or directly used by multi-modal language models (MLLMs) like GPT-4o, which may hallucinate. To address this, we propose a novel framework to evaluate the reliability of multi-modal RAG using two performance measures: (i) the relevancy score (RS), assessing the relevance of retrieved entries to the query, and (ii) the correctness score (CS), evaluating the accuracy of the generated response. We train RS and CS models using a ChatGPT-derived database and human evaluator samples. Results show that both models achieve ~88% accuracy on test data. Additionally, we construct a 5000-sample human-annotated database evaluating the relevancy of retrieved pieces and the correctness of response statements. Our RS model aligns with human preferences 20% more often than CLIP in retrieval, and our CS model matches human preferences ~91% of the time. Finally, we assess various RAG systems' selection and generation performances using RS and CS.

Key facts. Cited by 10 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Document understanding and multimodal RAG, one of 16 directions in Multimodal LLMs / vision-language models. Builds on 11 of its 17 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 7 Jan 2025.

Builds on

11 of 17 references.

References · 11

  1. 2021Learning Transferable Visual Models From Natural Language Supervisioncited by 33,456
  2. 2014Microsoft COCO: Common Objects in Contextcited by 17,498
  3. 2023LLaMA: Open and Efficient Foundation Language Modelscited by 13,958
  4. 2020Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Knowledge-Intensive NLP Taskscited by 9,160
  5. 2023Sigmoid Loss for Language Image Pre-Trainingcited by 3,048
  6. 2023InstructBLIP: Towards General-purpose Vision-Language Models with Instruction Tuningcited by 2,855
  7. 2019Fine-Tuning Language Models from Human Preferencescited by 2,124
  8. 2023VILA: On Pre-training for Visual Language Modelscited by 686
  9. 2024Lookback Lens: Detecting and Mitigating Contextual Hallucinations in Large Language Models Using Only Attention Mapscited by 140
  10. 2015Exploring Models and Data for Image Question Answeringcited by 139
  11. 2024MARS: Meaning-Aware Response Scoring for Uncertainty Estimation in Generative LLMscited by 45

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 6; 2026: 4.

10 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2024Searching for Best Practices in Retrieval-Augmented Generation
  2. 2025Finetune-RAG: Fine-Tuning Language Models to Resist Hallucination in Retrieval-Augmented Generation
  3. 2025FATHOMS-RAG: A Framework for the Assessment of Thinking and Observation in Multimodal Systems that use Retrieval Augmented Generation
  4. 2025Towards Lighter and Robust Evaluation for Retrieval Augmented Generation
  5. 2025RAGtifier: Evaluating RAG Generation Approaches of State-of-the-Art RAG Systems for the SIGIR LiveRAG Competition
  6. 2024A Survey on Retrieval-Augmented Text Generation for Large Language Models
  7. 2024Speculative RAG: Enhancing Retrieval Augmented Generation through Drafting
  8. 2024Optimizing Query Generation for Enhanced Document Retrieval in RAG