A Small Model Asks Better: Fine-Tuning Query Clarification for Retrieval-Augmented Generation
Organizations: IBM Research, USA
Abstract
Query clarification is essential for retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) systems that face ambiguous user queries. We consider multi-turn grounded conversational scenarios where a user query is either ill-formed or ambiguous in the context of the prior dialog or, more interestingly, it may be well-formed but when posed against retrieved documents there are multiple relevant interpretations. The task is to recognize both such cases and then generate an appropriate clarification request to the user. We present ClariEdge, a new dataset of approximately 3,900 examples that include such ambiguous queries along with negative examples that do not require clarification. We also show that a lightweight fine-tuned LoRA achieves 96.6% classification accuracy and outperforms prompted baselines of many larger models on both classification and quality of clarification generation. Our study shows that hard negatives are an essential ingredient to separate out queries that are truly ambiguous from queries that may look ambiguous but are not (i.e., can be resolved from the context). The same LoRA achieves high performance in both pre-retrieval and post-retrieval scenarios; thus, it can be used in two places in a RAG pipeline as a check before answer generation. The ClariEdge dataset is available at https://huggingface.co/datasets/ibm-research/ClariEdge.
Figures & tables
| Dataset | Ambiguity type | Multi- turn | Retri- eval | Hard negatives | Size |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AmbigQA | answer-set | ✗ | ✓ | ✗ | 14k |
| CLAMBER | typology | ✗ | ✗ | ✗ | 12k |
| ClariQ | facet | ✗ | ✓ | ✗ | 237 |
| Abg-CoQA | referential | ✓ | ✓ | ✗ | 8.6k |
| ClariEdge | entity-option | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | 3.9k |
| Category | Type | Train | Test | All |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ambiguous | positive | 967 | 104 | 1,071 |
| CLEAR-random | easy negative | 1,800 | 200 | 2,000 |
| CLEAR-hard | hard negative | 742 | 79 | 821 |
| Total | 3,509 | 383 | 3,892 |
| Category | User Query | Context | Why This Category |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ambiguous | “How did the fast food chain establish a significant presence in the US?” | Documents describe many fast food chains such as In-N-Out Burger, Jack in the Box | Multiple valid interpretations for fast food chain, the user must specify which one |
| CLEAR-random | “What is the capital of France?” | Documents contain a direct answer | Unambiguous query with a single clear interpretation |
| CLEAR-hard | “When are the services of this division available?” | Prior turn: “I work in the Northeast division” | Appears ambiguous (“this division”) but resolvable from prior context |
| Pattern | User Query | Why CLEAR |
|---|---|---|
| “Which one” comparison | “Which one has the best battery life?” | Comparing all entities, not asking about one specific |
| Follow-up question | “What’s the cancellation policy?” | General question about all discussed options |
| Terse query | “Price?” | No pronoun; asking about all entities, not one specific |
| Full Test Set | Pre-Retrieval | Post-Retrieval | |||||||||
| Model | Ambig. | C-rand. | C-hard | Overall | Ambig. | C-rand. | C-hard | Overall | Ambig. | C-rand. | Overall |
| Granite-4.1-3B LoRA | 91.3% | 99.5% | 96.2% | 96.6% | 84.5% | 98.0% | 96.2% | 93.0% | 100.0% | 100.0% | 100.0% |
| Granite-4.0-micro LoRA | 84.6% | 98.5% | 87.3% | 92.4% | 72.4% | 98.0% | 87.3% | 85.6% | 100.0% | 98.7% | 99.0% |
| GPT-OSS-20B LoRA | 76.9% | 98.5% | 86.1% | 90.1% | 62.1% | 100.0% | 86.1% | 82.4% | 95.7% | 98.0% | 97.4% |
| GPT-4o | 48.1% | 90.5% | 92.4% | 79.4% | 60.3% | 88.0% | 92.4% | 81.3% | 32.6% | 91.3% | 77.6% |
| GPT-5.6 Sol | 93.3% | 72.5% | 48.1% | 73.1% | 94.8% | 70.0% | 48.1% | 68.4% | 91.3% | 73.3% | 77.6% |
| Full Test Set | Pre-Retrieval | Post-Retrieval | ||||||||||
| Model | Corr. | Prec. | Rec. | F1 | Corr. | Prec. | Rec. | F1 | Corr. | Prec. | Rec. | F1 |
| Granite-4.1-3B LoRA | 95/104 | 92.7% | 85.7% | 89.0% | 49/58 | 89.3% | 80.9% | 84.9% | 46/46 | 96.3% | 90.7% | 93.4% |
| Granite-4.0-micro LoRA | 88/104 | 91.8% | 87.7% | 89.7% | 42/58 | 87.4% | 83.6% | 85.5% | 46/46 | 95.8% | 91.4% | 93.5% |
| GPT-OSS-20B LoRA | 80/104 | 89.1% | 82.3% | 85.6% | 36/58 | 83.5% | 81.9% | 82.7% | 44/46 | 93.7% | 82.6% | 87.8% |
| GPT-4o | 50/104 | 81.3% | 69.8% | 75.1% | 35/58 | 74.4% | 71.9% | 73.1% | 15/46 | 97.8% | 64.2% | 77.5% |
| GPT-5.6 Sol | 97/104 | 92.6% | 73.4% | 81.9% | 55/58 | 90.1% | 80.7% | 85.1% | 42/46 | 96.0% | 63.9% | 76.7% |
Appendix figures & tables6 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
| Pattern | # Opt. | User Query | Context | Clarification Response |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hedging with answers | 2–3 | “In which country is this language officially spoken?” | Docs: introduce languages such as Spanish, Italian, and Xhosa | “There are many languages you could be referring to, such as: 1) Spanish, which is officially spoken in Spain, 2) Italian, which is officially spoken in Italy, Switzerland, San Marino, Vatican City, and western Istria (in Slovenia and Croatia), and 3) Xhosa, which is officially spoken in South Africa and Zimbabwe. Which one are you talking about?” |
| Hedging over list | 4–8 | “How did the fast food chain establish a significant presence in the US?” | Docs: describe fast food chains such as In-N-Out Burger, Jack in the Box, Big Boy Restaurants, Chipotle Mexican Grill | “There are many fast food chains you could be talking about, like In-N-Out Burger, Jack in the Box, Big Boy Restaurants, or Chipotle Mexican Grill. Which one are you referring to?” |
| Open-domain | 8 | “Tell me about the American poet’s work” | Multiple American poets discussed in conversation | “Which American poet are you referring to?” |
| Example 1: Hedging over list | Example 2: Open-domain | |
|---|---|---|
| User query | “Is the language that descended from Common Brittonic still spoken today, or has it become extinct?” | “Where can I find information on the park amenities available at the New York county?” |
| Gold reference | “There are many languages that descended from Common Brittonic, such as: 1) Welsh, 2) Breton, and 3) Cornish. Which one are you referring to?” | “Which park are you interested in?” |
| Generated clarification | “There are several languages that descended from Common Brittonic, such as Welsh, Cornish, and Cumbric. Which one are you referring to?” | “There are many parks in New York county, such as Harriman State Park, Bear Mountain State Park, Minnewaska State Park, Rockland Lake State Park, and others. Which one are you interested in?” |
| Gold options | {Welsh, Breton, Cornish} | { } (open-ended, no specific options enumerated) |
| Generated options | {Welsh, Cornish, Cumbric} | {Harriman State Park, Bear Mountain State Park, Minnewaska State Park, Rockland Lake State Park, } |
| Precision | 3/3 = 1.0 (Cumbric is a valid Brittonic language, thus correct) | 5/5 = 1.0 (all four parks are valid; open-ended component is appropriate) |
| Classification Accuracy | Generation Quality | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Training Configuration | Ambiguous | CLEAR- random | CLEAR- hard | Overall | Correct | Prec. | Rec. | F1 |
| All training data | 84.6% | 98.5% | 87.3% | 92.4% | 88/104 | 91.7% | 87.5% | 89.5% |
| Hard negatives removed | 97.1% | 97.5% | 35.4% | 84.6% | 101/104 | 88.1% | 81.9% | 84.9% |
| Banking (230) | Telco (235) | |||||||
| Model | Ambig. | C-hard | C-rand. | Overall | Ambig. | C-hard | C-rand. | Overall |
| Granite-4.0-micro LoRA | 87.3% | 93.1% | 97.5% | 92.6% | 82.5% | 89.3% | 98.8% | 90.2% |
| GPT-4o | 53.2% | 61.1% | 96.2% | 70.4% | 48.8% | 68.0% | 93.8% | 70.2% |
| GPT-5.6 Sol | 86.1% | 29.2% | 67.1% | 61.7% | 82.5% | 38.7% | 67.5% | 63.4% |
| GPT-OSS-120B | 73.4% | 44.4% | 79.7% | 66.5% | 72.5% | 54.7% | 87.5% | 71.9% |
| GPT-OSS-20B | 81.0% | 37.5% | 63.3% | 61.3% | 80.0% | 46.7% | 72.5% | 66.8% |
| Banking (79 Ambiguous) | Telco (80 Ambiguous) | |||||||
| Model | Corr. | Prec. | Rec. | F1 | Corr. | Prec. | Rec. | F1 |
| Granite-4.0-micro LoRA | 69/79 | 83.81% | 79.42% | 81.56% | 66/80 | 95.03% | 84.19% | 89.28% |
| GPT-4o | 42/79 | 89.48% | 90.16% | 89.82% | 39/80 | 86.67% | 89.32% | 87.97% |
| GPT-5.6 Sol | 68/79 | 87.75% | 67.06% | 76.02% | 66/80 | 93.52% | 75.51% | 83.55% |
| GPT-OSS-120B | 58/79 | 84.99% | 71.90% | 77.90% | 58/80 | 87.64% | 78.99% | 83.09% |
| GPT-OSS-20B | 63/79 | 83.20% | 67.41% | 74.48% | 64/80 | 86.46% | 71.74% | 78.42% |
Clarification Question Generation
Clarification question generation teaches AI systems to identify missing intent and ask targeted follow-ups before answering or acting.
See all 40 papers