Coverage
Coverage asks what an evaluation actually reaches: languages, domains, classes, source documents, risk categories, thresholds, fallbacks, and user segments. It is different from quality. A slice can be covered and fail badly; an uncovered slice makes the aggregate score silent. This is why golden datasets need metadata, not just inputs and labels.
Measuring slice coverage
For categorical slices, coverage is the fraction of required cells with at least one valid example:
For numeric regions, define bins before evaluation: score thresholds, latency bands, document age, or confidence ranges. Repeated sampling can quantify metric variability, but it cannot create evidence for cells that have zero examples.
For evidence-grounded systems, source coverage uses the same idea over required source handles:
Worked calculation
Suppose the required launch claim spans four languages and two domains. The evaluation set contains English billing, English legal, German billing, German legal, and Spanish billing examples:
| language | billing | legal |
|---|---|---|
| English | covered | covered |
| German | covered | covered |
| Spanish | covered | missing |
| French | missing | missing |
The set covers 5 of 8 required language-domain cells, so slice coverage is . Aggregate accuracy from this set says nothing about French, and it only tests Spanish billing. That gap should block claims about broad launch readiness even if offline evaluation looks strong.
Caveats
Counting rows can exaggerate coverage when examples are near-duplicates. Source coverage is not answer coverage in RAG: a question may retrieve a policy document yet never exercise the refusal path. Coverage plans should include abstention and severe-error categories, not only happy-path inputs.
References
Nav