Measure RAG quality with retrieval metrics, generation evaluation, and end-to-end assessment using RAGAS and custom benchmarks.
How do you evaluate and measure RAG system quality?
RAG evaluation separates retrieval and generation metrics. Retrieval: precision@k, recall@k, MRR, NDCG. Generation: faithfulness, relevance, fluency. End-to-end: human evaluation or LLM-as-judge. Build evaluation datasets with questions, relevant documents, and ground-truth answers.
RAG systems have multiple failure modes that require different evaluation approaches:
• **Retrieval failures** — Right answer exists but wasn't retrieved
You need to evaluate each component independently and end-to-end. A good retrieval score doesn't guarantee good answers, and vice versa.
Evaluate retrieval quality independently:
Recall@k — What fraction of relevant documents appear in the top k results? Critical for ensuring the right information is available.
Precision@k — What fraction of retrieved documents are actually relevant? Measures retrieval noise.
MRR (Mean Reciprocal Rank) — How high is the first relevant document ranked? Important when users see limited results.
NDCG (Normalized Discounted Cumulative Gain) — Are relevant documents ranked appropriately? Considers position in the ranking.
Build a test set mapping queries to relevant document IDs. This requires manual annotation but is invaluable for development.
Measure generation quality on multiple dimensions:
Faithfulness — Is the answer factually supported by retrieved context? Detect hallucinations with NLI models or LLM-as-judge.
Relevance — Does the answer actually address the question? A faithful but off-topic answer is still a failure.
Completeness — Are all aspects of the question addressed? Complex queries may require multiple pieces of information.
Conciseness — Is there unnecessary information? Verbose answers with irrelevant content hurt user experience.
RAGAS framework provides automated metrics for these dimensions, combining model-based evaluation with retrieval assessment.
Create evaluation sets with:
• **Representative queries** — Cover expected use cases, including edge cases
**Getting started:**
**Maintaining evaluation sets:**
Quality evaluation data is an investment that pays off throughout development.
Monitor RAG systems continuously in production:
**Retrieval monitoring:**
**Generation monitoring:**
**User feedback:**
**A/B testing:**
Invest in feedback loops that improve the system over time.
Techniques to minimize LLM hallucinations in RAG including better retrieval, prompt engineering, verification, and UX design.
Learn effective chunking strategies including fixed-size, semantic, recursive, and sentence-window approaches for optimal RAG retrieval.
Compare Pinecone, Weaviate, Qdrant, pgvector, and Chroma to find the right vector database for your RAG implementation.
Explore more RAG implementation topics
Back to RAG AI Knowledge SystemsBased in Bangalore, we help enterprises across India and globally build RAG systems that deliver accurate, citable answers from your proprietary data.
We design document pipelines, chunking strategies, and embedding approaches tailored to your content types and query patterns.
Our RAG systems include hallucination detection, confidence scoring, source citations, and proper error handling from day one.
We implement access control, PII handling, audit logging, and compliant deployment for sensitive enterprise data.
Share your project details and we'll get back to you within 24 hours with a free consultation—no commitment required.
Boolean and Beyond
825/90, 13th Cross, 3rd Main
Mahalaxmi Layout, Bengaluru - 560086
590, Diwan Bahadur Rd
Near Savitha Hall, R.S. Puram
Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu 641002