Papers › R-Eval: A Unified Toolkit for Evaluating Domain Knowledge of Retrieval Augmented Large...
R-Eval: A Unified Toolkit for Evaluating Domain Knowledge of Retrieval Augmented Large Language Models
Shangqing Tu, Yuanchun Wang, Jifan Yu, Yuyang Xie, Yaran Shi, Xiaozhi Wang, Jing Zhang, Lei Hou, Juanzi Li
Large language models have achieved remarkable success on general NLP tasks, but they may fall short for domain-specific problems. Recently, various Retrieval-Augmented Large Language Models (RALLMs) are proposed to address this shortcoming. However, existing evaluation tools only provide a few baselines and evaluate them on various domains without mining the depth of domain knowledge. In this paper, we address the challenges of evaluating RALLMs by introducing the R-Eval toolkit, a Python toolkit designed to streamline the evaluation of different RAG workflows in conjunction with LLMs. Our toolkit, which supports popular built-in RAG workflows and allows for the incorporation of customized testing data on the specific domain, is designed to be user-friendly, modular, and extensible. We conduct an evaluation of 21 RALLMs across three task levels and two representative domains, revealing significant variations in the effectiveness of RALLMs across different tasks and domains. Our analysis emphasizes the importance of considering both task and domain requirements when choosing a RAG workflow and LLM combination. We are committed to continuously maintaining our platform at https://github.com/THU-KEG/R-Eval to facilitate both the industry and the researchers.
Code
Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.
Tasks
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.
Methods
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections