Battles, or side-by-side comparisons in so called arenas that elicit human preferences, have emerged as a popular approach to assessing the output quality of LLMs. Recently, this idea has been extended to retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) systems. While undoubtedly representing an advance in evaluation, battles have at least two drawbacks, particularly in the context of complex information-seeking queries: they are neither explanatory nor diagnostic. Recently, the nugget evaluation methodology has emerged as a promising approach to evaluate the quality of RAG answers. Nuggets decompose long-form LLM-generated answers into atomic facts, highlighting important pieces of information necessary in a "good" response. In this work, we apply our AutoNuggetizer framework to analyze data from roughly 7K Search Arena battles provided by LMArena in a fully automatic manner. Our results show a significant correlation between nugget scores and human preferences, showcasing promise in our approach to explainable and diagnostic system evaluations.
View on arXiv@article{sharifymoghaddam2025_2504.20006,
title={ Chatbot Arena Meets Nuggets: Towards Explanations and Diagnostics in the Evaluation of LLM Responses },
author={ Sahel Sharifymoghaddam and Shivani Upadhyay and Nandan Thakur and Ronak Pradeep and Jimmy Lin },
journal={arXiv preprint arXiv:2504.20006},
year={ 2025 }
}