Eval-Pair Matrix: Answer-Paired Meta-Evaluation of LLM Judges for Grounded RAG
On the map: Retrieval-augmented generation → RAG pipeline design and evaluation
Abstract (arXiv)
LLM-as-a-judge evaluation is widely used for retrieval-augmented generation (RAG), but reusing the same model family as both generator and judge makes self-leniency difficult to identify. We introduce Eval-Pair Matrix, a controlled meta evaluation protocol for source-grounded RAG. Starting from GaRAGe questions and grounding passages, we induce one hidden answer-causal contradiction per record, generate answers from perturbed passages with GPT, Grok, and Gemini models, and then use the same models as blind judges to evaluate each answer against the original passages. The experiment contains 300 core records, 897 labeled generator outputs, and 2,683 judge verdicts in a crossed 3 x 3 matrix; the primary analysis uses 275 fully validated records. Instead of comparing diagonal and off-diagonal cells across different answers, we estimate same-model effects by pairing judges on the exact same candidate answer. This changes the interpretation: diagonal and off diagonal F1 are similar, and the paired same-model recall effect is near zero (-0.5 pp; 95% cluster bootstrap CI [-2.7, +1.7]). The only robust paired gap is lower matching-judge flagging for answers that avoided the induced claim (-4.3 pp). A targeted human evaluation finds that reviewed apparent false positives are alternate source-error detections, mistakes in labeling whether the induced claim was adopted, or unclear cases; none were adjudicated as genuine false alarms. The lesson is methodological: RAG judge studies should report full matrices, answer-paired effects, behavior strata, and label-task alignment.
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 18 of its 25 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 12 Jul 2026.
Builds on
18 of 25 references.
Closest ancestors · 1
Same direction, newest first
Other references · 17
- 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
- 2023G-Eval: NLG Evaluation using GPT-4 with Better Human Alignmentcited by 2,276
- 2023FActScore: Fine-grained Atomic Evaluation of Factual Precision in Long Form Text Generationcited by 1,282
- 2024Length-Controlled AlpacaEval: A Simple Way to Debias Automatic Evaluatorscited by 897
- 2023Prometheus: Inducing Fine-grained Evaluation Capability in Language Modelscited by 575
- 2024Justice or Prejudice? Quantifying Biases in LLM-as-a-Judgecited by 368
- 2023RAGTruth: A Hallucination Corpus for Developing Trustworthy Retrieval-Augmented Language Modelscited by 283
- 2024Judging the Judges: A Systematic Study of Position Bias in LLM-as-a-Judgecited by 269
- 2024Self-Preference Bias in LLM-as-a-Judgecited by 258
- 2021Measuring Attribution in Natural Language Generation Modelscited by 256
- 2023LLMs as Narcissistic Evaluators: When Ego Inflates Evaluation Scorescited by 90
5 more
- 2025Play Favorites: A Statistical Method to Measure Self-Bias in LLM-as-a-Judgecited by 36
- 2025Beyond the Surface: Measuring Self-Preference in LLM Judgmentscited by 31
- 2024FaithBench: A Diverse Hallucination Benchmark for Summarization by Modern LLMscited by 24
- 2025GaRAGe: A Benchmark with Grounding Annotations for RAG Evaluationcited by 18
- 2026Time to REFLECT: Can We Trust LLM Judges for Evidence-based Research Agents?cited by 10
Built on by
Not cited yet.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026A Fixed-Budget, Cluster-Aware Standard for LLM-as-a-Judge Evaluation: A Multi-Hop RAG Stress Test
- 2024GroUSE: A Benchmark to Evaluate Evaluators in Grounded Question Answering
- 2026The RAT: A Unified Bayesian Model for RAG Evaluation
- 2026Why RAGs Hallucinate: Penalty-Aware Evaluation of Retrieval-Augmented Generation Systems with Knowledge-Gap Canaries
- 2026Assessing the Downstream Utility of Evidence-Aware Retrieval in RAG
- 2025Judge as A Judge: Improving the Evaluation of Retrieval-Augmented Generation through the Judge-Consistency of Large Language Models
- 2025RAGVUE: A Diagnostic View for Explainable and Automated Evaluation of Retrieval-Augmented Generation
- 2025OmniBench-RAG: A Multi-Domain Evaluation Platform for Retrieval-Augmented Generation Tools