Abstract
Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) grounds Large Language Models in external knowledge, yet current evaluations rely on discrete heuristics that suffer from ''epistemic blindness'' - failing to distinguish genuine contextual information extraction from parametric memory recall. To address this, we introduce the Normalized Context Utilization (NCU) metric, leveraging continuous token log-probabilities across zero-shot, oracle, and adversarial conditions to strictly quantify contextual information gain. Evaluating architectures ranging from 1.5B to 72B parameters alongside a proprietary commercial API reveals that for strict factual extraction (without Chain-of-Thought reasoning), traditional scaling laws exhibit extreme diminishing returns: highly efficient Small Language Models (SLMs) match or outperform high-capacity architectures. Furthermore, we demonstrate that ``Prior Dominance'' correlates with model scale and proprietary alignments. The evaluated commercial API not only overrode explicit external evidence in nearly half of adversarial conflicts, but also frequently suffered from systemic confidence collapse (Negative Transfer) when its parametric priors were contradicted. Our findings highlight the structural epistemic advantage and superior contextual adherence of SLMs in strict extraction workflows.
Explore similar work
Jul 29, 2026cs.CL
Language and embedding models used in RAG systems are conventionally assumed to require large-scale pretraining and explicit grounding supervision. We present B1ade, an efficient RAG architecture comprising two purpose-built components: a compact embedding model and a purpose-built SLM. B1ade-embed, a 335M parameter retrieval model constructed via parameter-free fusion of five pretrained encoders achieves top MTEB scores among sub-500M models with zero additional training, and B1ade-1B, an SLM trained on low-cost GPUs using Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO) on 723M tokens (2.2M examples) of curated context-question pairs with rewards that optimize only answer similarity. Our central finding is emergent attribution: despite receiving no explicit supervision for source citation, B1ade-1B cites retrieved passages in 42.4% of responses, exceeding the attribution rate of its training distribution by 5.5 percentage points. This demonstrates that grounding behavior can emerge as an accuracy-maximizing strategy under RL training, without explicit reward engineering. On standard QA benchmarks, B1ade-1B achieves 81.82% on PopQA, 65.8% on PubMedQA, and 51.09% on FEVER. In end-to-end RAG evaluation, B1ade-1B achieves an average score of 0.654 across correctness, completeness, coherence, and faithfulness, a 10.8% improvement over the SFT, while closing the gap with models 1.5x its size. These results show that strategic model composition and reward design suffice for resource-efficient RAG, without large-scale pretraining.
Shreyas Subramanian, Mecit Gungor, Vikram Elango
Jun 18, 2026cs.IR
Document-grounded assistants built on large language models are increasingly used in high-stakes, knowledge-intensive work. Their usefulness, however, may depend on how evidence is allocated before generation. We investigate such a claim by comparing two grounding architectures: (a) retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) that retrieves a few relevant passages, and (b) long-context prompting, which loads the whole document collection in context. We view these as two regimes of "epistemic access" on an accuracy--cost frontier. We use "epistemic accuracy" to capture model correctness that depends on having the right evidence. We posit that broader access (via long context) can increase it, but with a "token tax" (i.e., a substantial increase in cost due to larger input token consumption). We probe this framing with a case study in manufacturing safety training. Using an expert-validated benchmark, we evaluate 972 answers across three machines, two small language models, and three retrieval/in-context prompting approaches. Long-context prompting achieved the highest correctness (73.1% vs. 65.4% for semantic RAG), but at 26 times the per-query token cost. We interpret this gap as the token tax of broader evidentiary access. We carefully discuss the implications of our findings for resource-constrained organizations.
Austin Hamilton, Ryan Singh, Michael Wise +6
May 24, 2026cs.SE
Agentic RAG systems that equip language models with dozens to hundreds of tool definitions face a critical resource conflict: tool schemas consume the same context window needed for retrieval-augmented generation. We present the first systematic study of this tool-context trade-off, evaluating 14 models spanning 1.5B-32B local models plus one frontier API model across 6,566 controlled API calls at three context budgets (8K, 16K, 32K) with 28 tool definitions. Applying TSCG conservative-profile compression (44-50% schema token savings), we observe a binary enablement effect: at 8K tokens, JSON-schema tool definitions overflow the context window entirely, yielding near-zero EM (2.6% average), while compressed schemas restore RAG functionality with +20.5 pp average exact-match lift across all eight models (+24.7 pp among the six exhibiting full enablement). At 32K -- where both formats fit -- four of five tested models show delta <= 1 pp, confirming the effect is purely budget-driven. External validation on HotpotQA (50 multi-hop questions) shows +48 pp EM under the same overflow scenario. Frontier scaling tests demonstrate that JSON schemas overflow at ~494 tools while compressed schemas remain operational beyond 800 tools. Our results establish tool-schema compression as a necessary infrastructure layer for agentic RAG in constrained-context deployments. All code, data, and checkpoints are publicly available.
Furkan Sakizli