Knowledge Dependency Estimation for Reliable Question Answering

Chain-of-thought (CoT) supervision exposes intermediate rationales, but flat rationale targets usually optimize a single reasoning sequence and provide limited supervision on how local conclusions should support later decisions. We introduce Dependency-Aware Intermediate QA Supervision (DAIS), a training-time framework that converts filtered teacher rationales into stage-level QA records. Each intermediate record predicts a local answer conditioned on the previous states needed for that decision, while the final-answer record keeps the original task format; evaluation therefore uses only the original input and optional context. Across GDPR, AIACT, MedQA, and FOLIO with multiple Qwen backbones, DAIS improves average final-answer accuracy over answer-only, flat chain-of-thought, and independent-QA baselines. On policy-compliance benchmarks, it achieves a largest gain of 5.6% and an average gain of 4.2% over the strongest non-DAIS baseline. Controlled ablations show that valid previous-state conditioning contributes beyond longer targets or additional intermediate text, supporting dependency-conditioned intermediate QA as a lightweight auxiliary supervision signal for standard final-answer inference.

Estimating question difficulty is a critical component in evaluating and improving large language models (LLMs) for question answering (QA). Existing approaches often rely on readability formulas, retrieval-based signals, or popularity statistics, which may not fully capture the reasoning challenges posed to modern LLMs. In this paper, we introduce Q-DAPS (Question Difficulty based on Answer Plausibility Scores) method, a novel approach that estimates question difficulty by computing the entropy of plausibility scores over candidate answers. We systematically evaluate Q-DAPS across four prominent QA datasets-TriviaQA, NQ, MuSiQue, and QASC-demonstrating that it consistently outperforms baselines. Moreover, Q-DAPS shows strong robustness across hyperparameter variations and question types. Extensive ablation studies further show that Q-DAPS remains robust across different plausibility estimation paradigms, model sizes, and realistic settings. Human evaluations further confirm strong alignment between Q-DAPS's difficulty estimates and human judgments of question difficulty. Overall, Q-DAPS provides an interpretable, scalable, and bias-resilient approach to question difficulty estimation in modern QA systems.

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used for knowledge base question answering (KBQA), where answering requires selecting entities from a question-specific knowledge-graph subgraph. Yet LLMs are known to hallucinate across tasks, and KBQA is no exception: even when we provide a graph as the knowledge source, the model may rely on parametric knowledge instead of graph evidence or perform invalid reasoning over the given relations. Such hallucinated answer nodes can limit the practical deployment of KBQA systems, especially in high-stakes domains such as healthcare. We formulate hallucination detection in KBQA as an answer-node classification problem and propose a lightweight graph-based framework that treats the answering LLM as a black box. \methodname represents each KBQA instance as an augmented graph. It initializes node features with semantic representations of KG entities, marks topic entities and LLM-proposed answer nodes with learned vectors, and connect a virtual question node to the topic entities. A graph encoder then produces verification-oriented node representations, and a small MLP classifies each proposed answer node using its graph representation together with the question embedding. Experiments on WebQSP, ComplexWebQuestions, and PUGG show that our detector achieves the highest F1 on all three benchmarks ($82.0$, $87.4$, and $84.3$), outperforming LLM-as-judge and sampling-based baselines, while having $\sim305\times$ fewer parameters than the reference approaches. Beyond detection, the node-level feedback is actionable: when flagged answers are fed back to the KBQA system for iterative refinement, downstream KBQA F1 improves by $13.0$--$14.5$ points and Exact Match by $16.9$--$17.6$ points.