DICE: Discrete Interpretable Comparative Evaluation with Probabilistic Scoring for Retrieval-Augmented Generation
On the map: Retrieval-augmented generation → RAG pipeline design and evaluation
Abstract (arXiv)
As Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) systems evolve toward more sophisticated architectures, ensuring their trustworthiness through explainable and robust evaluation becomes critical. Existing scalar metrics suffer from limited interpretability, inadequate uncertainty quantification, and computational inefficiency in multi-system comparisons, hindering responsible deployment of RAG technologies. We introduce DICE (Discrete Interpretable Comparative Evaluation), a two-stage, evidence-coupled framework that advances explainability and robustness in RAG evaluation. DICE combines deep analytical reasoning with probabilistic A, B, Tie scoring to produce transparent, confidence-aware judgments that support accountable system improvement through interpretable reasoning traces, enabling systematic error diagnosis and actionable insights. To address efficiency challenges at scale, DICE employs a Swiss-system tournament that reduces computational complexity from O(N2) to O(N log N), achieving a 42.9% reduction in our eight-system evaluation while preserving ranking fidelity. Validation on a curated Chinese financial QA dataset demonstrates that DICE achieves 85.7% agreement with human experts, substantially outperforming existing LLM-based metrics such as RAGAS. Our results establish DICE as a responsible, explainable, and efficient paradigm for trustworthy RAG system assessment.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in RAG pipeline design and evaluation, one of 15 directions in Retrieval-augmented generation. Builds on 22 of its 26 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 27 Dec 2025.
Builds on
22 of 26 references.
Closest ancestors · 2
Same direction, newest first
- 2023Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Large Language Models: A Survey18 Dec
- 2023Ragas: Automated Evaluation of Retrieval Augmented Generation26 Sep
Other references · 20
- 2023GPT-4 Technical Reportcited by 18,396
- 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,971
- 2020Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Knowledge-Intensive NLP Taskscited by 9,297
- 2023Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arenacited by 8,626
- 2025DeepSeek-R1: Incentivizing Reasoning Capability in LLMs via Reinforcement Learningcited by 6,330
- 2019BERTScore: Evaluating Text Generation with BERTcited by 5,512
- 2024Qwen2.5 Technical Reportcited by 4,942
- 2020Learning to summarize from human feedbackcited by 2,588
- 2020BLEURT: Learning Robust Metrics for Text Generationcited by 1,203
- 2024Chatbot Arena: An Open Platform for Evaluating LLMs by Human Preferencecited by 1,184
- 2023Large Language Models are not Fair Evaluatorscited by 1,085
- 2020COMET: A Neural Framework for MT Evaluationcited by 1,033
8 more
- 2023SelfCheckGPT: Zero-Resource Black-Box Hallucination Detection for Generative Large Language Modelscited by 810
- 2021BARTScore: Evaluating Generated Text as Text Generationcited by 722
- 2023C-Pack: Packed Resources For General Chinese Embeddingscited by 578
- 2021MAUVE: Measuring the Gap Between Neural Text and Human Text using Divergence Frontierscited by 470
- 2019MoverScore: Text Generation Evaluating with Contextualized Embeddings and Earth Mover Distancecited by 418
- 2023GPTScore: Evaluate as You Desirecited by 361
- 2023Verbosity Bias in Preference Labeling by Large Language Modelscited by 91
- 2023How are Prompts Different in Terms of Sensitivity?cited by 35
Built on by
Not cited yet.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2025RAG-Zeval: Towards Robust and Interpretable Evaluation on RAG Responses through End-to-End Rule-Guided Reasoning
- 2025From Facts to Conclusions : Integrating Deductive Reasoning in Retrieval-Augmented LLMs
- 2025RAGVUE: A Diagnostic View for Explainable and Automated Evaluation of Retrieval-Augmented Generation
- 2026The RAT: A Unified Bayesian Model for RAG Evaluation
- 2025Beyond Component Strength: Synergistic Integration and Adaptive Calibration in Multi-Agent RAG Systems
- 2026Why RAGs Hallucinate: Penalty-Aware Evaluation of Retrieval-Augmented Generation Systems with Knowledge-Gap Canaries
- 2026A Fixed-Budget, Cluster-Aware Standard for LLM-as-a-Judge Evaluation: A Multi-Hop RAG Stress Test
- 2026URAG: A Benchmark for Uncertainty Quantification in Retrieval-Augmented Large Language Models