LLM agents increasingly answer questions over dynamic raw-document collections, where files may change before preprocessing, and relevant evidence (spans, sections, pages, or tables) is query-dependent. Existing retrieval-augmented approaches pre-materialize evidence via fixed chunking, embeddings, or persistent indexes: effective for lookup, yet costly, stale-prone, and committed to a granularity before the query is known.
arXiv:2608. 16185v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: LLM agents increasingly answer questions over dynamic raw-document collections, where files may change before preprocessing, and relevant evidence (spans, sections, pages, or tables) is query-dependent.
arXiv:2608. 07067v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Long-document understanding requires locating sparse and heterogeneous evidence across hundreds of pages, yet existing systems remain limited by static retrieval and fragile cross-round memory.
The paper introduces ORDER, a task‑conditioned retrieval‑augmented generation framework that dynamically adapts both indexing and retrieval strategies to each incoming query. It first clusters questions to learn cluster‑specific chunking, metadata filtering, and reranking settings, then routes queries to the appropriate pre‑built index via nearest‑centroid assignment. Additionally, a supervised query router predicts relevant collections and a Uniform Multi‑source Sampler distributes the retrieval budget evenly across selected sources, yielding superior performance on heterogeneous historical archives compared to existing RAG systems.
arXiv:2609.37226v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Answering questions and completing tasks over large document collections often requires connecting evidence spread across multiple documents, such as...
Clarify-Then-Search is a benchmark that tests whether large language models can ask clarification questions to improve the usefulness of deep search results. It uses 518 real-world query pairs from Baidu, where each intent query is paired with an underspecified version. The evaluation involves a clarifier asking up to three questions, a user answerer providing only explicit information, and a rewriter generating a new query that is then searched; performance is measured by a weighted nugget-recall score.
arXiv:2603. 26667v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) turns external documents into evidence for large language models.
arXiv:2606. 28349v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Long-context reasoning requires models to access, retrieve, and integrate evidence scattered across documents, dialogues, and accumulated interaction histories.
arXiv:2605. 06647v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Retrieval-augmented agents are increasingly the interface to large knowledge bases, yet most treat retrieval as a black box: they issue exploratory queries, inspect snippets, and reformulate until evidence emerges.
arXiv:2609.07093v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) enables large language models (LLMs) to answer questions by accessing external knowledge and has been widely a...
arXiv:2607. 23006v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Scientific question answering requires a retrieval system to solve two distinct problems: identifying which papers are relevant and locating the supporting evidence within those papers.
The paper introduces AtlasNav, a persistent multi‑view corpus‑navigation framework that organizes a corpus into a Corpus Atlas, enabling large‑language‑model agents to navigate efficiently under finite interaction budgets. AtlasNav reduces online inference cost by 30.21% and achieves 92.05% strict accuracy on BrowseComp‑Plus, while earlier and more rapidly realizing required evidence compared to dynamic‑workspace methods. The approach also transfers well to other corpora such as PhantomWiki and heterogeneous enterprise knowledge bases, demonstrating that effective agentic search relies on both accessible evidence and a reusable corpus representation.
The paper evaluates how modern large language models use internal web search to answer factual questions. Using 783 static queries and 288 dynamic queries, the authors find that enabling retrieval improves accuracy on static questions but hurts confidence calibration. On dynamic queries, models often retrieve but still achieve less than 70% accuracy, mainly due to poor query formulation and source selection, indicating that internal web search works better as a quick verification tool than a full information‑retrieval system.