arXiv:2607. 20527v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Agentic LLM systems such as OpenScholar and PaperQA2 read the scientific literature and return cited answers, and both they and their benchmarks already check whether those citations hold, with a fixed attribution model or human graders.
By Taewan Goo, Junsik Kim, Kyulhee Han, GwonYul Jo, Jong-Soo Kim, Tae-Hyung Kim
arXiv:2606. 23915v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Practice often treats automatic metrics for attribution in LLM retrieval-augmented generation as interchangeable.
By Tianyu Ding, Aditya Nannapaneni, Juan Pablo De la Cruz Weinstein
arXiv:2607. 18360v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) now routinely draft literature reviews and assist with academic writing, which means a higher risk of fabricated references: GPTZero found 53 papers with hallucinated citations among NeurIPS 2025's accepted set.
By Patrik Reizinger, Wieland Brendel
arXiv:2607. 23514v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Multimodal automated fact-checking (MAFC) verifies claims by retrieving and reasoning over external evidence.
By Haorui He, Xinwen Chen, Dacheng Wen, Reynold Cheng, Francis C. M. Lau, Yupeng Li
arXiv:2606. 26449v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Retrieval-augmented systems routinely present citations alongside generated answers, yet a citation does not confirm that the corresponding source meaningfully shaped the output.
By Mohammad Faizan, Dalal Alharthi
arXiv:2608. 14747v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: WANDR (Wide ANd Deep Research) is a benchmark of 500 realistic, challenging data-collection tasks for research agents.
By Vitaliy Polshkov, Marcin Pitera, Jeremy Yang, Kirill Priemko, Maksim Gaiduk, Aleksandr Nikolenko, Denis Bykov, Clare Southern, Denis Yarats, Jerry Ma
arXiv:2604. 19047v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Existing QA benchmarks typically assume distinct documents with minimal overlap, yet real-world retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) systems operate on corpora such as financial reports, legal codes, and patents, where information is highly redundant and documents exhibit strong inter-document similarity.
By Hanjun Cho, Jay-Yoon Lee
arXiv:2607. 09349v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Retrieval-augmented generation evaluation checks whether model claims are factually grounded in retrieved documents.
By Cedric Caruzzo, Donggeun Yoo, Tae Soo Kim
arXiv:2608. 06012v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Search-agent rewards mix answer quality, citation grounding, tool cost, and anti-hacking terms; a high score therefore need not imply that cited evidence was retrieved, and added penalties can cancel.
By Zhuowen Liu, Bohan Cui, YinShang Guo, Yuting Wang, Hao Li
arXiv:2606. 09556v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: AI Scientist agents are often evaluated as if capability were mainly a function of model quality, prompting, or reasoning scaffolds.
By Yinan Wang
arXiv:2607. 22584v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Standard Retrieval-Augmented Generation pipelines rank retrieved documents by semantic similarity alone, without accounting for source provenance or credibility.
By Yuktha Tata Koganti, Hugo Garrido-Lestache Belinchon
arXiv:2602. 16111v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Online media platforms track the share of impressions associated with content attributes, or prevalence, to evaluate trade-offs and set guardrails in A/B experiments.
By Zehao Xu, Tony Paek, Kevin O'Sullivan, Attila Dobi