cs.IRApr 15, 2026

Controlling Authority Retrieval: A Missing Retrieval Objective for Authority-Governed Knowledge

Authors: Andre Bacellar

Abstract

In law, regulatory regimes for pharmaceuticals and software security, newer authorities can revoke older established ones even when semantically distant. We call this CAR: retrieving the currently active authority frontier for a semantic anchor q, that is, front(cl(A_k(q))). This differs from finding the most similar document by relevance score: argmax_d s(q, d). Theorem 4 characterizes when a set R truly covers the active authority set for q with TCA(R, q)=1, providing conditions necessary and sufficient for any retrieved set R: frontier inclusion (front(cl(A_k(q))) contained in R) and no-ignored-superseder (no superseding document exists in the corpus outside R). Proposition 2 shows that TCA@k <= phi(q) * R_anchor(q) in the worst case over any scope-indexed algorithm, proved by an adversarial permutation argument. We evaluated on three real-world datasets: security advisories (Dense TCA@5=0.270, two-stage 0.975), SCOTUS overruling pairs (Dense TCA=0.172, two-stage 0.926), and FDA drug records (Dense TCA=0.064, two-stage 0.774). A GPT-4o-mini experiment shows Dense RAG produces explicit "not patched" claims for 39% of queries where a patch exists; two-stage cuts this to 16%. Four benchmark datasets, domain adapters, and a single-command scorer are released at https://github.com/andremir/car-retrieval.

Figures & tables

Appendix figures & tables1 asset

Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.

Appendix

Explore similar work

Sep 21, 2026

Re:CAP - Auditing Retrieval Coverage in Production RAG Pipelines

Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) is hard to monitor in production: exhaustive relevance labels do not exist for non-stationary multi-million-passage corpora that re-index in real time. As a result, retrieval quality is generally understudied and often deprioritised in favour of generation-oriented metrics. In this work, we propose auditing retrieval coverage by probing for evidence of missing documents rather than enumerating every relevant one. Our method Re:CAP (REtrieval Coverage Audit by iterative Probing) is a reference-free audit loop applied to a deployed RAG pipeline's initial answer and retrieved context: it identifies the topics already covered, generates probing questions for plausibly missing topics, retrieves candidate documents, and applies an LLM-as-judge to retain only those that introduce previously-unretrieved information. On four public benchmarks, Re:CAP recovers 9-29% of gold labels that flat BM25 top-500 cannot reach, rising to 48% on TREC-COVID. On MuSiQue Re:CAP beats flat hybrid top-500 by +12.9 pp on recall at less than half the document budget. An ensemble BM25, dense, and hybrid baseline (top-500 each) still leaves out 21.2% of gold docs on TREC-COVID that Re:CAP recovers; human annotators judge that 78.9% of those structurally distinct documents add new information to the baseline answer (Fleiss κκ = 0.79, n = 123), and 73.9% on live production traffic (n = 180). End-to-end recall is reproducible to within ±\pm1% across three independent runs, making Re:CAP a stable instrument for periodic retrieval audits.
May 31, 2026

DrugClaw and DrugAudit: A Primary-Source-Grounded Agent and Authority-Aware Benchmark for Drug-Information Question Answering

Drug-information question answering is a high-stakes setting where hallucinated facts can mislead clinical decision-making and the provenance of each cited fact matters as much as the fact itself. We present DrugClaw, a multi-agent retrieval-augmented system that queries a registry of drug and pharmacovigilance skills via a reflection-driven state-machine workflow and returns answers grounded in primary regulatory or peer-reviewed records. We also contribute DrugAudit, a 3,772-item authority-aware benchmark with an evaluation panel that scores upstream-of-gold source match, token-level semantic snippet overlap, and citation faithfulness under a dual-judge LLM-as-judge protocol with inter-judge kappa = 0.88 (almost-perfect). Across DrugAudit plus drug-related subsets of MedQA (751) and PubMedQA (512), DrugClaw is top-1 on every column of the headline table: composite Evidence Index under both judges, judge-mediated answer correctness, primary-source rate (0.918, +10.1 pp over next-best), faithfulness (0.887, +5.9 pp), MedQA (0.920), and PubMedQA (0.693).
Oct 15, 2026

CARA: Causally Guided Retrieval Agent for Question Answering

Retrieval-augmented generation over text-rich knowledge graphs requires identifying evidence that contributes to answering a question, rather than merely matching its textual content. Existing agentic retrievers adaptively balance global search and multi-hop exploration but primarily rely on textual similarity to guide retrieval. We propose CARA, a training-free, CAusally guided Retrieval Agent that explicitly evaluates the causal relevance of retrieved evidence through two complementary criteria: consequentiality, measuring whether adding evidence improves answerability, and essentiality, assessing whether removing evidence weakens answerability. CARA integrates these assessments with path consistency to guide graph exploration and employs reciprocal rank fusion to aggregate evidence from multiple agents. We evaluate CARA on three STaRK datasets and augment STaRK with ground-truth answers to enable downstream question answering evaluation. Experimental results demonstrate that CARA consistently outperforms existing retrievers. CARA also improves answer quality and faithfulness while examining fewer graph nodes and requiring fewer retrieval operations. These findings demonstrate that causal relevance assessment enables more focused and effective agentic graph retrieval, improving both retrieval performance and downstream question answering.