Paper detail

RAGVUE: A Diagnostic View for Explainable and Automated Evaluation of Retrieval-Augmented Generation

Evaluating Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) systems remains a challenging task: existing metrics often collapse heterogeneous behaviors into single scores and provide little insight into whether errors arise from retrieval,reasoning, or grounding. In this paper, we introduce RAGVUE, a diagnostic and explainable framework for automated, reference-free evaluation of RAG pipelines. RAGVUE decomposes RAG behavior into retrieval quality, answer relevance and completeness, strict claim-level faithfulness, and judge calibration. Each metric includes a structured explanation, making the evaluation process transparent. Our framework supports both manual metric selection and fully automated agentic evaluation. It also provides a Python API, CLI, and a local Streamlit interface for interactive usage. In comparative experiments, RAGVUE surfaces fine-grained failures that existing tools such as RAGAS often overlook. We showcase the full RAGVUE workflow and illustrate how it can be integrated into research pipelines and practical RAG development. The source code and detailed instructions on usage are publicly available on GitHub

preprint2025arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.