# Resources for Automated Evaluation of Assistive RAG Systems that Help Readers with News Trustworthiness Assessment

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2602.24277 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.24277/

## Key facts

- Cited by 1 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in RAG pipeline design and evaluation, one of 15 directions in Retrieval-augmented generation.
- Builds on 11 of its 35 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 27 Feb 2026.

## Placed in

- Retrieval-augmented generation / [RAG pipeline design and evaluation](https://mlsanity.com/rag/rag-pipeline-design-and-evaluation/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 11 of 11)

- [Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Knowledge-Intensive NLP Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.11401/) (2020)
- [Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arena](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.05685/) (2023)
- [A Survey on Hallucination in Large Language Models: Principles, Taxonomy, Challenges, and Open Questions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.05232/) (2023)
- [FEVER: a large-scale dataset for Fact Extraction and VERification](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1803.05355/) (2018)
- [Qwen3 Embedding: Advancing Text Embedding and Reranking Through Foundation Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.05176/) (2025)
- [On Faithfulness and Factuality in Abstractive Summarization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.00661/) (2020)
- [A Survey on Automated Fact-Checking](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2108.11896/) (2021)
- ["Liar, Liar Pants on Fire": A New Benchmark Dataset for Fake News Detection](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1705.00648/) (2017)
- [Automated Fact-Checking for Assisting Human Fact-Checkers](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2103.07769/) (2021)
- [The science of fake news](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.07903/) (2023)
- [The Great Nugget Recall: Automating Fact Extraction and RAG Evaluation with Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.15068/) (2025)

## Built on by (most cited first, 1 of 1)

- [From Holistic Evaluation to Structured Criteria: Rubrics Across the Evolving LLM Landscape](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.08625/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Many readers today struggle to assess the trustworthiness of online news because reliable reporting coexists with misinformation. The TREC 2025 DRAGUN (Detection, Retrieval, and Augmented Generation for Understanding News) Track provided a venue for researchers to develop and evaluate assistive RAG systems that support readers' news trustworthiness assessment by producing reader-oriented, well-attributed reports. As the organizers of the DRAGUN track, we describe the resources that we have newly developed to allow for the reuse of the track's tasks. The track had two tasks: (Task 1) Question Generation, producing 10 ranked investigative questions; and (Task 2, the main task) Report Generation, producing a 250-word report grounded in the MS MARCO V2.1 Segmented Corpus. As part of the track's evaluation, we had TREC assessors create importance-weighted rubrics of questions with expected short answers for 30 different news articles. These rubrics represent the information that assessors believe is important for readers to assess an article's trustworthiness. The assessors then used their rubrics to manually judge the participating teams' submitted runs. To make these tasks and their rubrics reusable, we have created an automated process to judge runs not part of the original assessing. We show that our AutoJudge ranks existing runs well compared to the TREC human-assessed evaluation (Kendall's τ = 0.678 for Task 1 and τ = 0.872 for Task 2). These resources enable both the evaluation of RAG systems for assistive news trustworthiness assessment and, with the human evaluation as a benchmark, research on improving automated RAG evaluation.