arXiv:2609.24101v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Automated biomedical evidence synthesis depends on retrieving published studies, but the biomedical literature is systematically skewed toward positive...
arXiv:2609.39026v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Deep Research agents synthesize evidence into cited reports, yet a well-cited report can still reach a misleading conclusion. Citation correctness chec...
The paper introduces BioCheck Agent, an LLM-based system that generates structured biomedical fact‑checking reports using agentic search and a reinforcement‑learning framework called EG‑GRPO. Unlike prior methods that output only supported or refuted labels, BioCheck Agent synthesizes conclusions with retrieved evidence from PubMed, employing advanced Boolean search operators. Experiments show that, compared to the base Qwen3.5‑4B model, BioCheck Agent improves label prediction accuracy on SciFact by 9.95 %, raises evidence quality by 3.7 %, and reduces hallucinations by 19.63 %.
The paper introduces "stale‑document poisoning," a temporal alignment failure where outdated retrieval evidence causes retrieval‑augmented generation models to produce incorrect answers even when the model could answer correctly without retrieval. A benchmark of 317 verified knowledge reversals across medicine, law, software, and platform policy shows that outdated evidence flips 30–37% of Llama and Qwen answers, rising to 66–75% when models are explicitly instructed to trust the document. The study demonstrates that providing explicit validity information and a recency‑aware re‑ranker can substantially reduce poisoning, highlighting the need for models to assess whether retrieved evidence remains applicable.
MOSAIC is a training‑free framework that adapts Graph Retrieval‑Augmented Generation (GraphRAG) to each query by converting query‑specific evidence needs into a bounded policy over seed selection, traversal, stopping, and evidence selection. It keeps the corpus graph, indexes, scoring, grounding, and answer generation shared, while an LLM analyzer tailors the exploration strategy per query. On GraphRAG‑Bench, MOSAIC improves answer correctness by over 5 points on Medical and 4 points on Novel, achieves high evidence recall and context relevancy, and reduces path and evidence evaluations compared to fixed policies.
The paper introduces Continual Search, an iterative framework that guides large language models to persistently search for diagnostic evidence in long AI agent execution logs, addressing the limitations of one-shot judgments. Evaluated on four existing RCA benchmarks and a new large-scale dataset called MegaRCA-Mix, Continual Search consistently boosts attribution performance, achieving a 40% F1 improvement for GPT‑5.5 on MegaRCA‑Mix. The results show that effective search can outweigh raw model scale, enabling lower-tier models to outperform higher-tier ones in root‑cause attribution tasks.
arXiv:2608. 02877v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Causal discovery recovers directed structure from observational data and is increasingly used in clinical settings to support mechanism reasoning and fairness audits of predictive models.
arXiv:2608. 06128v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Search agents extend large language models beyond static parametric memory by enabling them to acquire and use ex ternal evidence during multi-step reasoning.
arXiv:2608.21702v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) grounds LLM generation on retrieved documents, but the standard terminal retrieval stage--dense-vector similarity,...
arXiv:2604. 12243v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Identifying promising research directions in fast-moving subareas is one of the most cognitively expensive tasks in modern AI research.
The paper "Medical Causal Hypothesis Verification with Large Language Models" reports a small-scale study evaluating eight LLMs on 17 medical causal hypotheses. The authors introduce an evaluation framework and annotate 1,067 evidence points across six criteria, using nine metrics to assess performance. Results show that while LLMs have strong recall, they frequently fail to provide valid scientific articles, evidence, or reject unsupported hypotheses, revealing a critical limitation for their use in healthcare.
The paper proposes a distributional theory explaining how large language models (LLMs) incorporate external evidence into their decision-making process. It identifies three key predictions: (1) evidence is more persuasive when it aligns with the model’s prior beliefs, (2) models more readily accept errors from their own internal processes than from external sources, and (3) the same evidence can improve weaker models while harming stronger ones. Extensive experiments across ten million trials, twelve LLMs from four families, and eight domains—including quantum mechanics, physics, genetics, and molecular biology—confirm these predictions and reveal that evidence integration occurs late in the network as a structured sequence of steps rather than through a simple trust metric.