Granuscore: A Reference-Free Measure of Granularity for Text Analysis and Question Answering

Evaluating retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) systems requires benchmarks that capture diverse question characteristics, yet practitioners lack empirical guidance on which dimensions to vary and at what granularity. We present HieraRAG, a hierarchical framework for studying granularity in RAG benchmark construction, defining optimal granularity as the level that maximizes discriminative power (the standard deviation of generation quality across categories) within a given RAG configuration. As a case study, we generate 5,872 synthetic question-answer (QA) pairs from FineWeb-10BT across 3 dimensions (Question Complexity, Answer Type, Linguistic Variation) at 3 granularity levels (2, 4, and 8 categories). With a BM25+Falcon-3-10B pipeline, optimal granularity varies by dimension: complexity benefits from fine-grained distinctions (discriminative power: 0.053) while answer type and linguistic variation peak at medium granularity. We introduce a Coherence Ratio metric to quantify whether fine-grained splits cleanly subdivide parent categories, revealing structural differences across dimensions (Question Complexity: 0.40 vs. Answer Type: 1.44). Human evaluation of 110 stratified QA pairs confirms synthetic quality. While these specific findings reflect a single configuration, HieraRAG provides a portable procedure and validation metric for practitioners to determine evaluation granularity within their own RAG settings.

Citation granularity -- whether to cite individual sentences, paragraphs, or documents -- is a critical design choice in attributed generation. While fine-grained citations are commonly preferred for precise human verification, their impact on model performance remains under-explored. We analyze four model scales (8B-120B) and demonstrate that enforcing fine-grained (sentence-level) citations forfeits gains of 2-97% (median 40%) relative to the best-performing granularity, and up to 338% on individual tasks. Strikingly, setting citation granularity to its optimal value (based on attribution quality) unlocks these substantial gains while leaving overall answer correctness essentially unchanged (between -2.3% and +4.4%). We observe a consistent pattern where attribution quality peaks at intermediate (paragraph-level) granularities: finer citations appear to sever the semantic dependencies needed to ground a claim, while excessively coarse citations introduce distracting noise. Importantly, this performance gap varies with scale: when a claim rests on a small or moderate amount of evidence, it disproportionately penalizes larger models by disrupting the multi-sentence information synthesis at which they excel. Fine-grained citation rests on the premise that a sentence is a sufficient unit of evidence on its own. Our results indicate that it often is not, and that this is a property of the model rather than of the citation standard. Standards fixed for human verifiability may therefore paradoxically degrade the very attribution they aim to ensure; effective attribution requires matching granularity to the model's semantic scope rather than fixing it by convention.

Text-based person retrieval faces a critical but under-explored challenge: the inherent uncertainty of query granularity in real-world scenarios. This paper introduces a new paradigm, Text-based Person Retrieval with Any Granularity, and provides a systematic solution. First, we formalize a five-level granularity spectrum and construct UFine6926-MG, a high-quality multi-grained dataset annotated comprehensively at all granularities via a novel Multi-grained Text Annotation Engine. Second, acknowledging that coarse queries naturally correspond to multiple valid candidates, we propose MG-Eval, a holistic evaluation benchmark with progressively detailed texts and cross-identity labels that reflect real-world semantics, alongside tailored evaluation metrics and protocols. Third, after a comprehensive diagnosis reveals the systemic limitations of existing research, we propose the Cross-modal Multi-grained Aligning and Matching (CMAM) framework. CMAM achieves granularity-aware retrieval through: 1) orthogonal-expert perception to disentangle granularity-specific features; 2) probabilistic alignment to model many-to-many matches under query uncertainty; and 3) granularity-consistent reasoning to steer feature learning via joint cross-modal granularity verification. Experiments demonstrate that CMAM significantly outperforms state-of-the-art methods across all granularity levels. This work establishes a foundational benchmark and a robust baseline, paving the way for more practical person retrieval systems.