Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) faces a hard constraint in public-facing nutri-tion QA: answers must be faithful to official sources. Yet Chinese official nutrition data lacks an auditable evaluation benchmark —numeric faithfulness, refusal bound-aries, and hallucination suppression remain unquantified. We present NutriQA, a traceable RAG question-answering benchmark on official Chinese nutrition data: 200 items in a four-category taxonomy (composition 60 / guideline 50 / special 50 / re-fusal 40), a three-level gold-provenance system (official food-composition values, ver-batim guideline excerpts, gold-free refusal items), and fully auditable deterministic judgment rules (numeric ±1 tolerance + key-point coverage + fabrication detection). Full-scale experiments on three commercial models (qwen-plus, deepseek-chat, glm-5.3-flash) show: (1) hybrid retrieval (BM25 character-bigram + vector RRF, top_k=8) achieves a 160/160 hit rate, with retrieval method choice outweighing chunking gran-ularity; (2) retrieval optimization lifts RAG gain from ~0.15–0.17 to 0.20–0.225, de-coupling retrieval hit from the generator; (3) a novel boundary subclass (out-of-KB foods × numeric baits) quantifies 100% numeric fabrication by bare LLMs over out-of-KB objects with mutually exclusive cross-model intervals (3–4× apart), which RAG compresses to ~0–2.5% via“retrieved-not-covered → refuse”; (4) deterministic rules agree with human annotation at 0.949, outperforming a generic LLM judge at 0.846. Data, code, and full evidence are pinned at git tag v1.0.0 for independent verification and reproduction.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yulin Zhao (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 8 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: