The paper evaluates how modern large language models use internal web search to answer factual questions. Using 783 static queries and 288 dynamic queries, the authors find that enabling retrieval improves accuracy on static questions but hurts confidence calibration. On dynamic queries, models often retrieve but still achieve less than 70% accuracy, mainly due to poor query formulation and source selection, indicating that internal web search works better as a quick verification tool than a full information‑retrieval system.
By Sahil Kale
Safety benchmarks for large language models often assess the risk of a user query, although the outcome of question answering depends on whether the response violates a policy. This distinction is cri...
ReliableRAG is a new framework for Retrieval-Augmented Generation that tackles misinformation in multi‑hop question answering. It extracts structured triples from retrieved documents, evaluates each triple’s reliability by combining semantic relevance to the query with credibility, and keeps only the top‑K reliable, non‑redundant triples. Using these refined triples, the system builds robust reasoning chains that filter out deceptive misinformation and produce accurate, trustworthy answers.
By Jinpu Jiang, Xuan Wu, Wenhao Song, Bo Yang, You Zhou, Hongwei Ge, Heow Pueh Lee, Yanchun Liang, Chunguo Wu
WildSEEK is a new dataset of 3,000 real user information‑seeking queries, manually annotated for risk‑sensitive domains and whether the query is factoid or analytical. The accompanying evaluation framework tests LLM responses against four failure criteria—sycophantic behavior, overreliance, a default US‑centric perspective, and poor handling of vulnerable populations—finding higher failure rates for analytical queries. The authors also train classifiers on WildSEEK to analyze over 1.8 million realistic queries, revealing that more than a third are high‑risk and often analytical.
By Tanise Ceron, Joachim Baumann, Elisa Bassignana, Berat Cabuk, Dirk Hovy, Debora Nozza
arXiv:2507. 02983v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) hold significant promise for transforming digital health by enabling automated medical question answering.
By Mohammad Anas Azeez, Rafiq Ali, Ebad Shabbir, Zohaib Hasan Siddiqui, Gautam Siddharth Kashyap, Jiechao Gao, Usman Naseem
Large language models have made natural language interfaces to databases (NLIDB) newly credible, but LLM text-to-SQL systems fail in a way that matters for deployment: a hallucinated column or a mis-a...
arXiv:2609.00319v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Online health information seeking is shifting from keyword search, where users consider a ranked list of links, to conversational systems that compos...
By Phuong Anh Nguyen, Jill Noorily, Matthew Flathers, Haruka Notsu, Laura Ospina-Pinillos, Tommy Nguyen, Samantha Clark, Aoife Keane, Grace Thompson, John Torous
arXiv:2609.01210v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Safety benchmarks for large language models often assess the risk of a user query, although the outcome of question answering depends on whether the...
By Rui Yang, Shuang Huang, Junhua Liu, Ziqi Zhao, Qingzhong Yan, Yuhang Sun, Cong Liu, Guoping Hu, Rui Mei, Jing Shao
arXiv:2511. 03217v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) excel in generating fluent utterances but can lack reliable grounding in verified information.
By Shaghayegh Kolli, Richard Rosenbaum, Timo Cavelius, Lasse Strothe, Andrii Lata, Jana Diesner
arXiv:2608.30303v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Search agents reduce hallucination by grounding answers in retrieved web evidence. Yet reliance on retrieval also creates an attack surface: poisoned c...
By Yulin Zhang, Yukun Huang, Sanxing Chen, Tianyi Lin, Ziang Yang, Xunjian Yin, Bhuwan Dhingra
arXiv:2606. 05901v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) have fundamentally transformed the landscape of Natural Language Processing.
By Christopher J. Wedge, Joshua Stutter, Danny Dixon, Jacek Ca{\l}a
arXiv:2604. 12138v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: This position paper argues that Retrieval-Augmented Generation systems exhibit a systematic factual bias-optimizing for epistemic uncertainty reduction while ignoring the aleatoric uncertainty inherent in opinion-rich content - and that this misalignment demands a paradigm shift in retrieval system design.
By Aditya Agrawal, Alwarappan Nakkiran, Darshan Fofadiya, Alex Karlsson, Harsha Aduri