See HardRAG evaluate a risky RAG response.
Follow a response from query and retrieved context through grounding review, privacy checks, judge consensus, and audit evidence.
Live Validation
Inference INF-2048
Grounding
2.1/5
PII Risk
Medium
Policy
Flagged
Judge
66.7%
Unsupported Claim
The answer references a promotional interest rate that is not present in the retrieved policy context.
Demo scenarios
Fintech hallucination
A loan answer includes a rate not found in the retrieved policy.
Healthcare privacy leak
A response exposes patient-like identifiers from retrieved context.
Policy violation
The model gives prohibited financial or operational advice.
Jailbreak attempt
A user tries to bypass safety and disclosure boundaries.
From generated answer to reviewable evidence.
Input
Query, retrieved chunks, and generated answer are submitted for review.
Evaluate
HardRAG checks grounding, policy, privacy, jailbreak risk, toxicity, and judge consensus.
Record
The result is stored with scores, rationales, metadata, and a tamper-evident hash.
Act
Teams can approve, block, harden, or investigate the answer depending on policy.
Dashboard overview
Track validation volume, risk trends, and review queues.
Audit record
Review scores, rationales, unsupported claims, and privacy findings.
Privacy controls
Detect and mask sensitive patterns before evidence is shared.
Bring your own RAG scenario.
The best demo uses your risk pattern: finance, healthcare, internal policy, legal search, or customer support.