Benchmark Almanac

RGB

Dropped

Models answer English and Chinese news questions from retrieved passages, testing noise robustness, negative rejection, information integration, and counterfactual robustness. Scored by accuracy.

In the authors’ words

Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) is a promising approach for mitigating the hallucination of large language models (LLMs). However, existing research lacks rigorous evaluation of the impact of retrieval-augmented generation on different large language models, which make it challenging to identify the potential bottlenecks in the capabilities of RAG for different LLMs. In this paper, we systematically investigate the impact of Retrieval-Augmented Generation on large language models. We analyze the performance of different large language models in 4 fundamental abilities required for RAG, including noise robustness, negative rejection, information integration, and counterfactual robustness. To this end, we establish Retrieval-Augmented Generation Benchmark (RGB), a new corpus for RAG evaluation in both English and Chinese. RGB divides the instances within the benchmark into 4 separate testbeds based on the aforementioned fundamental abilities required to resolve the case. Then we evaluate 6 representative LLMs on RGB to diagnose the challenges of current LLMs when applying RAG. Evaluation reveals that while LLMs exhibit a certain degree of noise robustness, they still struggle significantly in terms of negative rejection, information integration, and dealing with false information. The aforementioned assessment outcomes indicate that there is still a considerable journey ahead to effectively apply RAG to LLMs.

Abstract of Benchmarking Large Language Models in Retrieval-Augmented Generation (arXiv:2309.01431, CC0)
Made by Chinese Academy of Sciences (ISCAS) Released Sep 2023 Faithful to sources All tasks public Last in a launch post Feb 2024 , dropped before it saturated Last model added Feb 2024
Level
Everyday Most adults, without training
Scored
Checked automatically A program checks the result against an answer key, unit tests or the expected final state.
Answers
Short answer A number, word or short string matched to a key.
1
Launch post lists it, from 1 lab

No scores here yet

No lab, leaderboard or Epoch AI run has reported a score for RGB yet.

No launch post has listed it since Feb 2024

Launch posts from every lab that has listed it, one tick per post. Tall colored ticks include it, and short gray ones leave it out.

Qwen
DateLaunch postScoreAs the post writes it
5 Feb 2024 Qwen1.5-72B RGB English: Noise 0.8 81.67 / Rejection 1.0 48.67 / Integration 0.4 61.00 / Counterfactual 28.00

More in Factuality

All 70 in Factuality
  • SimpleVQA In use Models answer 2,025 short factual questions about images across 9 tasks and 9 topics. An LLM judge grades answers against fixed references. Qwen3.7-Plus 81.7%
  • HallusionBench In use Models answer 1,129 yes or no questions about 346 images, built in pairs to expose language hallucination and visual illusion. Scored by accuracy. Keye-VL-2.0-30B-A3B 73.5%
  • SimpleQA Verified In use 1,000 human-verified, de-duplicated short-answer factual questions measuring parametric knowledge. Gemini 3.1 Pro 77.5%
  • GaRAGe In use Models write long-form RAG answers to 2,366 questions with human-annotated grounding passages. Scoring checks whether answers use the relevant passages. Nemotron 3.5 Bolt E4B 40.7%
  • Kimi Hallu Bench In use Models answer hard prompts drawn from practical work tasks. Fact-checking agents score the share of claims that are hallucinated. Kimi K3.1 Pro 8.30%
  • RAGTruth In use A word-level annotated corpus of hallucinations in retrieval-augmented generation answers. It is used to train and evaluate hallucination detection and RAG faithfulness. Nemotron 3.5 Bolt E4B 77.9%