Production-first AI evaluation

Your AI change passed eval and shipped last week.Are your customers actually getting better answers - or did you just hope?

Most evaluation tools score one dimension on synthetic prompts. The failures your customers actually see - wrong numbers, drifting context, hallucinated citations - slip through because they don't show up until the response is in the wild.

variA/Bly is the deterministic evaluation layer for production AI. 40+ scored dimensions, claim-level grounding, hallucination detection - same input, same score, every run. Experimentation built on top, so when you ship a change, you know whether it actually improved the system.

Why evaluation on variA/Bly is auditable
Every response scored with multi-dimensional 40+ metrics, not just fluency
Claims verified against retrieved context - hallucinations caught
Statistical confidence tells you when you have a real winner
Test on real production traffic, not synthetic benchmarks

1,000 free credits.

AI Evaluation Results

Catch hallucinations, verify grounding, defend every claim with an auditable trail - powered by deterministic scoring across 40+ dimensions.

Faithfulness
94%
Hallucination Rate
3.2%
Claim Coverage
91%
Context Retention
88%
chunks: 847claims verified: 2,341depth: 4 turns
Run Ledger · EXP-4821winner locked
Confidence
94.2%
Drift
-12%
Safety
98%
control72%
winner94%
$ variably deploy --variant=winner

What teams measure with variA/Bly

94%
faithfulness
3.2%
hallucination rate
cleaner FPR vs LLM-as-judge
50%+
lower per-eval cost
<1 ms
SDK latency added
40+
dimensions across 6 categories
95%+
statistical confidence
2x
faster iteration cycles
the problem

Your eval said 91%. The hallucination still reached the customer.

Most teams score AI responses with shallow metrics - fluency, relevance, a thumbs up from an LLM judge. The score lands at 91%. The ungrounded answer still ships.

Why? Because standard eval never sees the retrieved chunks from your RAG pipeline. It never checks whether claims exist in source documents. It never tracks whether turn 5 contradicts turn 2 across multi-turn interactions.

The result? Two variants both score 91%. You ship one and hope. That's not evaluation - that's a coin flip dressed up as a metric.

Shallow evaluation makes every deployment a gamble.

What typical eval sees
Prompt
Response
Score: 92%passed
What they miss
Retrieved chunks
Source documents
Conversation history
Claim grounding
Cross-turn consistency
the number nobody else publishes

6× cleaner on the failure mode that produces compliance breaches.

We benchmarked variA/Bly head-to-head against RAGAS on the public RGB dataset. Same 592 question + answer + reference tuples, both scorers, scripts open-sourced. Here's the failure rate that matters.

variA/Bly
6.1%FPR on distractors

When variA/Bly says “grounded”, it's right 9 out of 10 times. Built for regulated, customer-facing AI.

RAGAS (LLM-as-judge)
38.2%FPR on distractors

The LLM judge defaults to “probably verifiable” on keyword overlap — even when the passage doesn't actually support the claim.

Read the full benchmark report

Methodology · 12-phase journey · reproduction scripts · downloadable PDFs

Everything you need to actually know which variant won.

Deep evaluation, statistical A/B testing, and the audit trail to prove what shipped. Built for teams whose AI customers deserve more than gut-feel decisions.

Capability

Prompt Registry

Version prompts and configurations with clear history, rollback, and deployment tracking.

Capability

Golden Datasets

Define representative test cases and benchmark quality consistently.

Capability

AI Optimization

Generate improved variants based on evaluation patterns and weaknesses.

Capability

Multi-Category Evaluation

40+ metrics across 6 categories: quality, safety, grounding, semantic, coherence, advanced.

Capability

Multi-Provider

Compare providers and models without changing your experimentation workflow.

Capability

Statistical Analysis

Measure win rate, confidence, and effect size to support shipping decisions.

How AI experimentation works

Five steps to test AI changes, compare performance, and ship winners with confidence.

1

Define your dataset

Create representative evaluation cases that reflect real user interactions and edge cases.

2

Run an experiment

Test prompt, model, retrieval, or configuration variants with controlled traffic allocation.

3

Score responses

Evaluate outputs across 40+ dimensions in 6 categories: quality, safety, grounding, semantic, coherence, advanced.

4

Compare results

Measure quality, business outcomes, and statistical confidence across variants.

5

Deploy the winner

Roll out the highest-performing version and keep monitoring for drift over time.

The experiment engine considers:

  • Your golden examples (ideal responses)
  • Multi-category, 40+ dimensional evaluation scores
  • Identified strengths to preserve
  • Weaknesses to address
25%+
quality improvement
30-50%
cost reduction
40%+
time saved per iteration
cleaner hallucination detection (vs RAGAS)
50%+
lower per-eval cost (vs LLM-as-judge)
faster ship decisions

Use cases

Built for teams shipping AI in production

From customer-facing copilots to regulated decision agents, variA/Bly helps teams experiment with AI behavior where quality, trust, and outcomes matter.

Customer Support AI

Test tone, escalation logic, guardrails, and retrieval quality to improve CSAT and reduce escalations.

AI Interview & Hiring Agents

Evaluate scoring prompts, decision consistency, and candidate experience across different interview flows.

AI Knowledge Assistants

Compare retrieval strategies, prompt templates, and models to improve answer quality and reduce failure cases.

Healthcare & Clinical AI

Validate grounding against medical sources, catch hallucinations on dosage and diagnoses, and ship with auditable confidence.

Financial Services AI

A/B test advisory copilots, KYC agents, and fraud-explanation flows. Catch regressions before they hit a regulator.

Legal & Compliance AI

Compare contract-review and case-retrieval pipelines across models. Score citations and contradictions claim-by-claim.

Sales & Outbound Agents

Evaluate prospecting, personalization, and qualification logic. Ship the variant that converts, not the one that sounds good.

E-commerce & Retail AI

Test conversational shopping, search relevance, and product Q&A across catalogs and customer segments.

Internal Copilots & Ops

IT helpdesk, code copilots, document Q&A — measure quality and cost across models before rolling out company-wide.

Works with any LLM

Provider-agnostic SDK. Call your model however you want; score the response with one line. Swap models mid-experiment without changing your evaluation pipeline.

OpenAI
GPT-4o, GPT-4, o1
Anthropic
Claude 3.5 Sonnet, Opus
Google
Gemini 1.5 Pro, Flash
Meta
Llama 3, Llama 4
Mistral
Mistral Large, Mixtral
Cohere
Command R+, Embed
xAI
Grok
AWS Bedrock
Multi-model gateway
Azure OpenAI
Hosted
Self-hosted
Bring your own model

...and any other provider with an HTTP API. The SDK doesn't care which model produced the response.