Query-Aware Source-Risk Triage for Retrieval-Augmented Generation
Read the original on arXiv AI →The Flow has not summarised this story yet — read it at arXiv AI.
The Flow has not summarised this story yet — read it at arXiv AI.
arXiv:2607. 04281v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Semantic caching reduces the latency and cost of retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) by serving cached answers to semantically similar queries, but most existing methods do not model the time-varying freshness of open-web 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.
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:2606. 02581v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) faces a fundamental three-way tension: deeper retrieval improves factual grounding but inflates token costs and end-to-end latency.
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.
WildSEEK is a new dataset of 3,000 real user information‑seeking queries, manually annotated for risk‑sensitive domains and whether the query is factoid or analytical. The accompanying evaluation framework tests LLM responses against four failure criteria—sycophantic behavior, overreliance, a default US‑centric perspective, and poor handling of vulnerable populations—finding higher failure rates for analytical queries. The authors also train classifiers on WildSEEK to analyze over 1.8 million realistic queries, revealing that more than a third are high‑risk and often analytical.