arXiv:2607. 10491v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Retrieval-augmented generation grounds large language models in external evidence, but most pipelines still treat retrieved passages as deterministic and mutually consistent context.
arXiv:2606. 00432v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: As retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) systems scale, it becomes increasingly challenging to ensure faithful grounding in external evidence.
arXiv:2605. 17301v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) systems implicitly assume mutual consistency among retrieved documents -- an assumption that frequently fails in practice.
arXiv:2606. 13550v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Retrieval augmented generation (RAG) depends critically on the quality and granularity of retrieved evidence.
arXiv:2512. 11614v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) relies on retrieved context to guide large language models (LLM), yet treats the retrieval as a heuristic rather than verifiable evidence -- leading to unsupported answers, hallucinations, and reliance on spurious context.
arXiv:2605. 14473v4 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) is usually evaluated by whether the final answer is correct.
arXiv:2606. 26437v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Existing metrics for factuality and faithfulness evaluate whether an answer is supported or contradicted by its grounding documents, but they fail to capture when both supporting and contradicting evidence coexist.
arXiv:2508. 01273v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Explicit knowledge conflicts, occurring when retrieved contexts contain contradictory information, pose a fundamental challenge for Large Language Models (LLMs) as they integrate increasingly diverse data sources.
arXiv:2606. 32012v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Uncertainty estimation has been a long-standing challenge in AI models; it amounts to "knowing what you don't know," and metacognition is notoriously difficult even for humans (cf.
Recent advancements in Large Language Models (LLMs) have enabled sophisticated reasoning and content generation, yet their inherent stochasticity poses significant challenges for ensuring predictive credibility. While traditional uncertainty taxonomy paradigms, such as the dichotomy of aleatoric and epistemic uncertainties, provide conceptual foundations, they often fail to capture the multi-component and multi-stage nature of LLM generation and struggle to evaluate the effectiveness of various Uncertainty Quantification (UQ) methods.
arXiv:2606. 29090v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) has become the standard way to ground large language models in external knowledge, yet most systems retrieve a fixed number of passages for every question regardless of its difficulty.
arXiv:2608. 16515v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) improves large language models by grounding generation in external evidence, but it also introduces a source trust problem: retrieved context may be useful, irrelevant, or even misleading.
arXiv:2607. 17935v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Automated fact-checking remains a challenge for Large Language Models (LLMs) due to "query brittleness" in traditional retrieval systems.