arXiv:2608. 00585v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Verification for retrieval-augmented generation usually scores each retrieved chunk and drops the ones that fail.
arXiv:2605. 03534v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) grounds answers in retrieved passages, yet relevance does not guarantee sufficiency: a topical passage may still fail to justify the answer.
arXiv:2608. 04569v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Hard prompt compression reduces long-context inference cost by independently scoring tokens, sentences, or chunks and retaining the highest-scoring units under a budget.
arXiv:2606. 02488v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Multi-hop question-answering systems often use expensive retrieval on every question.
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.
arXiv:2607. 14552v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: A standard recipe for distilling the reasoning ability of large language models (LLMs) is to sample chains of thought from the model, keep those that reach the correct final answer, and fine-tune on the survivors.
arXiv:2607. 04223v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) reduces but does not eliminate hallucination, and existing detectors return a single answer-level score that does not indicate which sentence is unsupported, or why.
arXiv:2608. 15428v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Multiple-choice benchmarks are graded on whether a model picks the right option, not on whether it needed the question.
arXiv:2606. 16890v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Aggregate accuracy benchmarks conceal a systematic structure in how large language models fail at electronic health record (EHR) question answering: questions requiring more inferential steps produce disproportionately more errors.
arXiv:2606. 05633v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Retrieval-augmented QA pipelines often route retrieved passages through an LLM \emph{rewriter} before a smaller reader, lifting F1 by tens of points on multi-hop benchmarks; this gain is typically credited to improved evidence quality.
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.
arXiv:2601. 19827v4 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) extends large language models (LLMs) beyond parametric knowledge, yet it is unclear when iterative retrieval-reasoning loops meaningfully outperform static RAG, particularly in scientific domains with multi-hop reasoning, sparse domain knowledge, and heterogeneous evidence.
arXiv:2608. 13588v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Multi-hop question answering requires complex reasoning across multiple evidence segments, which often overwhelms retrieval-augmented generation systems with lengthy and noisy contexts, thereby undermining both efficiency and accuracy.