DoGMaTiQ: Automated Generation of Question-and-Answer Nuggets for Report Evaluation

Evaluation of long-form, citation-backed reports has lately received significant attention due to the wide-scale adoption of retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) systems. Core to many evaluation frameworks is the use of atomic facts, or nuggets, to assess a report's coverage of query-relevant information attested in the underlying collection. While nuggets have traditionally been represented as short statements, recent work has used question-answer (QA) representations, enabling fine-grained evaluations that decouple the information need (i.e. the question) from the potentially diverse content that satisfies it (i.e. its answers). A persistent challenge for nugget-based evaluation is the need to manually curate sets of nuggets for each topic in a test collection -- a laborious process that scales poorly to novel information needs. This challenge is acute in cross-lingual settings, where information is found in multilingual source documents. Accordingly, we introduce DoGMaTiQ, a pipeline for generating high-quality QA-based nugget sets in three stages: (1) document-grounded nugget generation, (2) paraphrase clustering, and (3) nugget subselection based on principled quality criteria. We integrate DoGMaTiQ nuggets with AutoArgue -- a recent nugget-based evaluation framework -- to enable fully automatic evaluation of generated reports. We conduct extensive experiments on two cross-lingual TREC shared tasks, NeuCLIR and RAGTIME, showing strong rank correlations with both human-in-the-loop and fully manual judgments. Finally, detailed analysis of our pipeline reveals that a strong LLM nugget generator is key, and that the system rankings induced by DoGMaTiQ are robust to outlier systems. We facilitate future research in report evaluation by publicly releasing our code and artifacts at https://github.com/manestay/dogmatiq.

CoverageBench: Evaluating Information Coverage across Tasks and Domains

We wish to measure the information coverage of an ad hoc retrieval algorithm, that is, how much of the range of available relevant information is covered by the search results. Information coverage is a central aspect for retrieval, especially when the retrieval system is integrated with generative models in a retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) system. The classic metrics for ad hoc retrieval, precision and recall, reward a system as more and more relevant documents are retrieved. However, since relevance in ad hoc test collections is defined for a document without any relation to other documents that might contain the same information, high recall is sufficient but not necessary to ensure coverage. The same is true for other metrics such as rank-biased precision (RBP), normalized discounted cumulative gain (nDCG), and mean average precision (MAP). Test collections developed around the notion of diversity ranking in web search incorporate multiple aspects that support a concept of coverage in the web domain. In this work, we construct a suite of collections for evaluating information coverage from existing collections. This suite offers researchers a unified testbed spanning multiple genres and tasks. All topics, nuggets, relevance labels, and baseline rankings are released on Hugging Face Datasets, along with instructions for accessing the publicly available document collections.

Does Reasoning Make Search More Fair? Comparing Fairness in Reasoning and Non-Reasoning Rerankers

While reasoning rerankers, such as Rank1, have demonstrated strong abilities in improving ranking relevance, it is unclear how they perform on other retrieval qualities such as fairness. We conduct the first systematic comparison of fairness between reasoning and non-reasoning rerankers. Using the TREC 2022 Fair Ranking Track dataset, we evaluate six reranking models across multiple retrieval settings and demographic attributes. Our findings demonstrate reasoning neither improve nor harm fairness compared to non-reasoning approaches. Our fairness metric, Attention-Weighted Rank Fairness (AWRF) remained stable (0.33-0.35) across all models, even as relevance varies substantially (nDCG 0.247-1.000). Demographic breakdown analysis revealed fairness gaps for geographic attributes regardless of model architecture. These results indicate that future work in specializing reasoning models to be aware of fairness attributes could lead to improvements, as current implementations preserve the fairness characteristics of their input ranking.

Beyond Relevance: On the Relationship Between Retrieval and RAG Information Coverage

Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) systems combine document retrieval with a generative model to address complex information seeking tasks like report generation. While the relationship between retrieval quality and generation effectiveness seems intuitive, it has not been systematically studied. We investigate whether upstream retrieval metrics can serve as reliable early indicators of the final generated response's information coverage. Through experiments across two text RAG benchmarks (TREC NeuCLIR 2024 and TREC RAG 2024) and one multimodal benchmark (WikiVideo), we analyze 15 text retrieval stacks and 10 multimodal retrieval stacks across four RAG pipelines and multiple evaluation frameworks (Auto-ARGUE and MiRAGE). Our findings demonstrate strong correlations between coverage-based retrieval metrics and nugget coverage in generated responses at both topic and system levels. This relationship holds most strongly when retrieval objectives align with generation goals, though more complex iterative RAG pipelines can partially decouple generation quality from retrieval effectiveness. These findings provide empirical support for using retrieval metrics as proxies for RAG performance.

Overview of the TREC 2025 RAGTIME Track

The principal goal of the RAG TREC Instrument for Multilingual Evaluation (RAGTIME) track at TREC is to study report generation from multilingual source documents. The track has created a document collection containing Arabic, Chinese, English, and Russian news stories. RAGTIME includes three task types: Multilingual Report Generation, English Report Generation, and Multilingual Information Retrieval (MLIR). A total of 125 runs were submitted by 13 participating teams (and as baselines by the track coordinators) for three tasks. This overview describes these three tasks and presents the available results.

NeuCLIRTech: Chinese Monolingual and Cross-Language Information Retrieval Evaluation in a Challenging Domain

Measuring advances in retrieval requires test collections with relevance judgments that can faithfully distinguish systems. This paper presents NeuCLIRTech, an evaluation collection for cross-language retrieval over technical information. The collection consists of technical documents written natively in Chinese and those same documents machine translated into English. It includes 110 queries with relevance judgments. The collection supports two retrieval scenarios: monolingual retrieval in Chinese, and cross-language retrieval with English as the query language. NeuCLIRTech combines the TREC NeuCLIR track topics of 2023 and 2024. The 110 queries with 35,962 document judgments provide strong statistical discriminatory power when trying to distinguish retrieval approaches. A fusion baseline of strong neural retrieval systems is included so that developers of reranking algorithms are not reliant on BM25 as their first stage retriever. The dataset and artifacts are released on Huggingface Datasets

LANCER: LLM Reranking for Nugget Coverage

Unlike short-form retrieval-augmented generation (RAG), such as factoid question answering, long-form RAG requires retrieval to provide documents covering a wide range of relevant information. Automated report generation exemplifies this setting: it requires not only relevant information but also a more elaborate response with comprehensive information. Yet, existing retrieval methods are primarily optimized for relevance ranking rather than information coverage. To address this limitation, we propose LANCER, an LLM-based reranking method for nugget coverage. LANCER predicts what sub-questions should be answered to satisfy an information need, predicts which documents answer these sub-questions, and reranks documents in order to provide a ranked list covering as many information nuggets as possible. Our empirical results show that LANCER enhances the quality of retrieval as measured by nugget coverage metrics, achieving higher $α$-nDCG and information coverage than other LLM-based reranking methods. Our oracle analysis further reveals that sub-question generation plays an essential role.

Incorporating Q&A Nuggets into Retrieval-Augmented Generation

RAGE systems integrate ideas from automatic evaluation (E) into Retrieval-augmented Generation (RAG). As one such example, we present Crucible, a Nugget-Augmented Generation System that preserves explicit citation provenance by constructing a bank of Q&A nuggets from retrieved documents and uses them to guide extraction, selection, and report generation. Reasoning on nuggets avoids repeated information through clear and interpretable Q&A semantics - instead of opaque cluster abstractions - while maintaining citation provenance throughout the entire generation process. Evaluated on the TREC NeuCLIR 2024 collection, our Crucible system substantially outperforms Ginger, a recent nugget-based RAG system, in nugget recall, density, and citation grounding.

Insider Knowledge: How Much Can RAG Systems Gain from Evaluation Secrets?

RAG systems are increasingly evaluated and optimized using LLM judges, an approach that is rapidly becoming the dominant paradigm for system assessment. Nugget-based approaches in particular are now embedded not only in evaluation frameworks but also in the architectures of RAG systems themselves. While this integration can lead to genuine improvements, it also creates a risk of faulty measurements due to circularity. In this paper, we investigate this risk through comparative experiments with nugget-based RAG systems, including Ginger and Crucible, against strong baselines such as GPT-Researcher. By deliberately modifying Crucible to generate outputs optimized for an LLM judge, we show that near-perfect evaluation scores can be achieved when elements of the evaluation - such as prompt templates or gold nuggets - are leaked or can be predicted. Our results highlight the importance of blind evaluation settings and methodological diversity to guard against mistaking metric overfitting for genuine system progress.

RoutIR: Fast Serving of Retrieval Pipelines for Retrieval-Augmented Generation

Retrieval models are key components of Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) systems, which generate search queries, process the documents returned, and generate a response. RAG systems are often dynamic and may involve multiple rounds of retrieval. While many state-of-the-art retrieval methods are available through academic IR platforms, these platforms are typically designed for the Cranfield paradigm in which all queries are known up front and can be batch processed offline. This simplification accelerates research but leaves state-of-the-art retrieval models unable to support downstream applications that require online services, such as arbitrary dynamic RAG pipelines that involve looping, feedback, or even self-organizing agents. In this work, we introduce RoutIR, a Python package that provides a simple and efficient HTTP API that wraps arbitrary retrieval methods, including first stage retrieval, reranking, query expansion, and result fusion. By providing a minimal JSON configuration file specifying the retrieval models to serve, RoutIR can be used to construct and query retrieval pipelines on-the-fly using any permutation of available models (e.g., fusing the results of several first-stage retrieval methods followed by reranking). The API automatically performs asynchronous query batching and caches results by default. While many state-of-the-art retrieval methods are already supported by the package, RoutIR is also easily expandable by implementing the Engine abstract class. The package is open-sourced and publicly available on GitHub: http://github.com/hltcoe/routir.