Multi-Field Hybrid Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Maritime Accident Root Cause Analysis

Traffic accident liability analysis is a critical yet challenging task in intelligent transportation and legal assistance. Existing methods often suffer from low efficiency, subjective judgment, and inconsistent analysis results. Meanwhile, large language models are constrained by noisy video inputs and insufficient legal domain knowledge. To address these issues, this work presents TrafficRAG, a multimodal retrieval-augmented framework for automated traffic accident analysis and report generation. Specifically, the proposed framework first adopts a vision-language model to produce structured textual descriptions of accident scenarios, which serve as accurate retrieval queries. Based on these textual queries, a hybrid retrieval strategy integrating BM25 sparse retrieval and dense embedding retrieval is employed to fetch relevant traffic regulations and similar historical cases. Finally, the large language model incorporates retrieved legal knowledge and multimodal accident evidence for comprehensive reasoning, and generates standardized, legally grounded liability analysis reports. Extensive experiments show that TrafficRAG consistently outperforms baseline methods, achieving 77.32% Legal Norm Adaptation Accuracy, 81.71% Factual Faithfulness, and a Liability Ratio MAE of 5.48%. The results validate that integrating multimodal factual evidence with legal clauses via retrieval augmentation can effectively improve the reliability and accuracy of traffic accident liability determination.

Standard Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) systems predominantly rely on semantic relevance as a proxy for utility. However, this assumption collapses in realistic decision-making scenarios where user queries are laden with cognitive biases, such as false premises or confirmation bias. In such cases, maximizing relevance paradoxically promotes the retrieval of sycophantic evidence that reinforces hallucinations, a critical failure we term the ``Relevance-Robustness Gap''. To bridge this gap, we propose CoRM-RAG (Counterfactual Risk Minimization for RAG), a framework that aligns retrieval with decision safety rather than mere similarity. Grounded in causal intervention, we introduce a Cognitive Perturbation Protocol to simulate user biases during training, which is then distilled into a lightweight Evidence Critic. This scoring module learns to identify documents that possess sufficient evidential strength to steer the model toward correctness despite adversarial query perturbations. Extensive experiments on decision-making benchmarks demonstrate that CoRM-RAG significantly outperforms strong dense retrievers and LLM-based rerankers in adversarial settings, while enabling effective risk-aware abstention through reliable robustness scoring. Our code is available at https://github.com/PeiYangLiu/CoRM-RAG.git.

Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) enhances Large Language Models (LLMs) by grounding their responses in external knowledge, but conventional pipelines rely on static, single-step retrieval that limits performance on complex queries. This paper presents an Agent-Orchestrated Adaptive RAG framework that introduces dynamic query decomposition, iterative retrieval, and a bounded self-reflective evaluation loop. We evaluate the system across two complementary datasets: a domain-specific DevOps knowledge base and the multi-hop reasoning benchmark MuSiQue. Using metrics that include overall score, citation accuracy, mean reciprocal rank, and topic coverage, we find that query decomposition yields consistent gains in the structured domain (overall score $+0.04$, MRR $+0.17$ on DevOps) but degrades ranking precision on the multi-hop benchmark, while the reflection mechanism improves citation accuracy at a substantial latency cost. These contrasting results show that agentic enhancements are not universally beneficial and must be applied selectively according to query and domain characteristics. Our findings argue for adaptive, cost-aware orchestration rather than uniformly aggressive reasoning pipelines.