Are LLM judges reliable enough to be measurement instruments for RAG evaluation?
Measure test-retest stability, agreement with human labels, and calibration error across judge models and prompt variants, including our own unreleased rag-eval-toolkit as one of the instruments under test. Compare locally-run open-weight judges against frontier API judges on cost per reliable verdict.
- Datasets
- RAGTruth, HaluEval, LLM-AggreFact, ExpertQA (all public)
- Status
- Experiment design, July 2026. No data collected yet.
- Deliverable
- Judge scorecard with published methodology and raw results
A repeated-measures design needs many thousands of judge calls, which is the main thing that decides how wide this study can go. We will publish the exact run counts and the cost alongside the results.
Do RAG evaluation frameworks disagree when scoring identical outputs, and can readable prompts explain why?
Score the same labeled examples through Ragas, DeepEval, and rag-eval-toolkit. Quantify disagreement, then trace specific disagreements back to prompt wording.
- Datasets
- RAGTruth, WikiEval
- Status
- Experiment design, July 2026. No data collected yet.
- Deliverable
- Framework agreement matrix with prompt-level root causes
rag-eval-toolkit is unreleased. It runs in this comparison as an internal instrument, not as a tool the reader can install today.