Coverage Under Contradiction: A Benchmark for Negation-Aware Retrieval
Read the original on arXiv Computation and Language →The Flow has not summarised this story yet — read it at arXiv Computation and Language.
The Flow has not summarised this story yet — read it at arXiv Computation and Language.
arXiv:2608. 04591v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are often asked whether something is absent from a record, list, or retrieved context.
arXiv:2609.37469v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) grounds large language models in external sources, but retrieved passages often name the right entities without...
arXiv:2602. 09616v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Reliable retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) systems depend fundamentally on the retriever's ability to find relevant information.
arXiv:2606.11350v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) degrades when applied to large, heterogeneous document collections. In RAG systems, dense similarity becomes l...
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.
arXiv:2607. 26339v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) systems ground large language models (LLMs) in external corpora, but this reliance exposes them to corpus poisoning: maliciously injected passages that manipulate retrieved evidence.