The paper introduces the concept of LLM‑specific utility, defining it as the performance gain a target large language model (LLM) achieves when provided with a passage compared to answering without evidence. A benchmark of utilitarian passages is built for four LLMs (Qwen3‑8B/14B/32B and Llama 3.1‑8B) across three QA datasets, revealing that each model benefits most from its own tailored evidence and that evidence optimized for other models is consistently suboptimal. The authors also create SpecUBench, a benchmark for LLM‑specific utility judgment, and show that current utility‑aware retrieval methods largely capture model‑agnostic usefulness, struggling to estimate LLM‑specific utility.
"whyItMatters":"The study demonstrates that retrieval‑augmented generation must consider model‑specific evidence selection to truly improve LLM performance, highlighting a gap in existing utility‑aware methods."
By Hengran Zhang, Keping Bi, Jiafeng Guo, Jiaming Zhang, Shuaiqiang Wang, Dawei Yin, Xueqi Cheng
arXiv:2607. 24838v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: In medical multiple-choice question answering (MCQA), Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) can supplement the domain knowledge of language models (LMs).
By Seongwon Seo, Seung Hwan Cho, Young-Min Kim
Q2D-Web is a new large‑scale benchmark for agentic Retrieval‑Augmented Generation (RAG) systems, featuring a 190 million‑document web corpus and 70 k machine‑reformulated search queries in ten languages. It supplies three sets of relevance judgments—agent citations, production rankings, and a combined set enriched with LLM‑based labels—to evaluate first‑stage retrievers. Experiments on 13 retrievers show consistent ranking across judgment sets but significant variation across domains, languages, and query types, and demonstrate that a carefully sampled sub‑corpus can approximate full‑corpus evaluation with minimal loss in Recall@1000.
arXiv:2607. 25600v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Retrieval-augmented generation improves knowledge-intensive question answering, but indiscriminate retrieval can introduce irrelevant evidence and unnecessary computation.
By Chandan Kumar Sah, Xiaoli Lian, Li Zhang
The paper evaluates how robust large language models (LLMs) are when using retrieval‑augmented generation (RAG) in practical settings. It investigates whether RAG always outperforms non‑RAG approaches, whether adding more retrieved documents helps, and whether the order of documents matters, using a benchmark of 1,891 samples across five datasets and three task categories. Experiments with 11 LLMs show generally high retrieval robustness, but performance varies by task and prompting strategy, indicating that adopting RAG should be considered on a case‑by‑case basis.
By Shuyang Cao, Karthik Radhakrishnan, David Rosenberg, Steven Lu, Pengxiang Cheng, Lu Wang, Shiyue Zhang
arXiv:2608. 10471v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Prompt optimizers automate the search for prompts that improve language-model performance, but existing methods rely on a predefined optimization procedure: the algorithm determines which candidates to explore and how the search progresses, while the language model generates or refines prompt proposals.
By Subhash Bangalore Satheesha, Nirvik Pande, Deepthi Duddempudi, Bharath Dandala
arXiv:2607. 21324v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) systems increasingly employ multiple LLM agents.
By Paolo Pedinotti, Enrico Santus
arXiv:2607. 10555v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Generative Large Language Models (LLMs) have revolutionized information retrieval, yet their strictly parametric nature frequently leads to severe factual hallucinations when confronted with complex queries beyond their epistemic boundaries.
By Zichuan Liu, Ruijin Hua
arXiv:2603. 03292v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) exhibit high reasoning capacity in medical question-answering, but their tendency to produce hallucinations and outdated knowledge poses critical risks in healthcare fields.
By Wenhao Wu, Zhentao Tang, Yafu Li, Shixiong Kai, Mingxuan Yuan, Zhenhong Sun, Chunlin Chen, Zhi Wang
The paper introduces Tasks over Application Manuals (TAM), a benchmark designed to test long‑horizon procedural reasoning in large language models. TAM uses real‑world tasks from ICD‑10‑CM clinical coding and U.S. federal sentencing, requiring models to follow extensive, rule‑based manuals and perform interdependent steps to produce exact answers. Experiments with GPT‑5 and various prompting strategies show very low exact‑match accuracy—1% for coding and 15.5% for sentencing—highlighting a gap between current benchmarks and the ability to reliably follow complex procedures.
By Utkarsh Soni, Syed Shariyar Murtaza, Yifan Nie, Sachin Chandrasekhar, Eugene Wen
arXiv:2606. 29328v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) typically treats context selection as ranking chunks against a single query embedding.
By Bingxue Zhang, Jianying Jia, Feida Zhu
arXiv:2511. 05385v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) utilizes external knowledge to augment Large Language Models' (LLMs) reliability.
By Chao Zhang, Yuhao Wang, Derong Xu, Haoxin Zhang, Yuanjie Lyu, Yuhao Chen, Shuochen Liu, Tong Xu, Xiangyu Zhao, Yan Gao, Yao Hu, Enhong Chen