arXiv:2607. 21324v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) systems increasingly employ multiple LLM agents.
Machine-generated by The Flow from the publisher's headline and feed description — not written or checked by a human. The full article lives at arXiv AI.
Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) systems increasingly employ multiple LLM agents. Yet, most prior work optimizes components in isolation rather than coordinating improvements across the pipeline.
arXiv:2601. 21162v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Graph Retrieval-Augmented Generation (Graph-RAG) enhances multihop question answering by organizing corpora into knowledge graphs and routing evidence through relational structure.
arXiv:2608.22479v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) enables LLMs to access external knowledge for answering knowledge-intensive questions. For complex multi-hop quest...
arXiv:2608. 01269v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Hierarchical Graph Retrieval-Augmented Generation (GraphRAG) organizes corpus knowledge at multiple levels of granularity, yet fixed context construction may fail to translate these multi-resolution representations into a context suited to the current query.
VikingRAG is a directory‑aware semantic data management system that reduces token usage in retrieval‑augmented generation by tightly integrating semantic and structural access. It employs multi‑round retrieval traces as reusable experience edges and an adaptive escalation strategy to avoid unnecessary multi‑round exploration. Experiments show that VikingRAG achieves comparable accuracy to state‑of‑the‑art methods while using only 11.6%–51.9% of their tokens, and further reductions to 5.1%–32.5% with trace reuse and escalation.
Q2D-Web is a new large‑scale benchmark for agentic Retrieval‑Augmented Generation (RAG) systems, featuring a 190 million‑document web corpus and 70 k machine‑reformulated search queries in ten languages. It supplies three sets of relevance judgments—agent citations, production rankings, and a combined set enriched with LLM‑based labels—to evaluate first‑stage retrievers. Experiments on 13 retrievers show consistent ranking across judgment sets but significant variation across domains, languages, and query types, and demonstrate that a carefully sampled sub‑corpus can approximate full‑corpus evaluation with minimal loss in Recall@1000.