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: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:2609.07075v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) is commonly evaluated by whether the final answer is correct. That test is insufficient: an answer can match its r...
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: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: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.
arXiv:2608. 03177v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: How can question answering (QA) systems determine whether a query is ambiguous?
ReliableRAG is a new framework for Retrieval-Augmented Generation that tackles misinformation in multi‑hop question answering. It extracts structured triples from retrieved documents, evaluates each triple’s reliability by combining semantic relevance to the query with credibility, and keeps only the top‑K reliable, non‑redundant triples. Using these refined triples, the system builds robust reasoning chains that filter out deceptive misinformation and produce accurate, trustworthy answers.
The paper introduces TrustPropRAG, a method that builds a document relation graph to propagate reliability signals across documents in retrieval‑augmented generation systems. By anchoring this propagation with a limited set of human feedback on document reliability, the approach estimates trust scores through an optimization problem that incorporates pairwise relations and user input. These trust scores are then used to select more reliable documents and generate answers that are aware of document trustworthiness, leading to improved retrieval quality and exact match performance compared to baselines, even with sparse or noisy feedback.
The paper introduces TRACE, a fine‑tuning framework for Retrieval‑Augmented Generation (RAG) that addresses conflicts between retrieved knowledge and a model’s internal knowledge. TRACE uses multi‑agent debate traces to identify correct and incorrect candidates and answer‑shift patterns, providing fine‑grained supervision for reliable knowledge‑source selection. It also incorporates an answer‑completeness regularization mechanism to prevent empty, overly short, or prematurely terminated responses, thereby improving robustness against misleading retrieved content and enhancing answer quality.
arXiv:2606. 20245v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) have achieved strong performance across a wide range of language-based tasks by leveraging both extensive parametric knowledge and in-context learning ability, enabling them to incorporate external information provided in the input prompt.
arXiv:2607. 25959v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Wikipedia and Wikidata are widely used for information access, LLM pre-training, and retrieval-augmented generation.
arXiv:2606. 03066v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: The rapid rise of generative AI has made multimodal fake news increasingly realistic and pervasive, posing severe threats to public trust and social stability.