RAGAS (Es et al., 2023) employs the WikiEval Dataset to assess the faithfulness, answer relevance, and context relevance of RALMs. Faithfulness is defined as the degree to which responses align with the provided context. Answer relevance refers to the extent to which generated responses address the actual question posed. Context relevance is gauged by the degree to which retrieved context is centralized and devoid of irrelevant information. Additionally, the researchers utilize the prompt gpt-3.5-turbo-16k model to automate the evaluation process. RGB (Chen et al., 2024) developed a bilingual Chinese and English evaluation system employing three evaluation metrics: accuracy, rejection rate, and error detection rate. These metrics were utilized to assess the noise robustness, negative rejection, information integration, and counterfactual robustness of the data sources, which were articles processed by LM and retrieved through Google's API. CRUD-RAG (Lyu et al., 2024) considers the impact of retrieval components and the construction of external knowledge bases that have not been previously considered by researchers. A dataset was generated using a large model to evaluate the Create, Read, Update, and Delete (summarization) capabilities of RALM through four evaluation metrics: ROUGE, BLEU, bertScore, and RAGQuestEval. In addition, ARES (Saad-Falcon et al., 2023) employs datasets generated by the LM, but utilizes a lightweight LM to determine the quality of individual RALM components and utilizes human-labeled data points for prediction-powered inference. The RALM's context is evaluated using the KILT and SuperGLUE benchmarks, with Relevance, Answer Faithfulness, and Answer Relevance being the relevant criteria.