Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) can improve factual grounding without guaranteeing that every generated claim is supported. Previous work has studied claim-level conformal factuality in single-stage RAG and, more recently, multi-hop RAG. We examine its behavior in agentic RAG, where a language-model policy adaptively issues follow-up retrieval queries or terminates retrieval before response generation. We retain the retrieval-based relevance-scoring formulation and post-generation conformal filtering and evaluate six model-dataset configurations: GPT-6 Luna and Llama 3.1 8B on HotpotQA, Natural Questions, and TriviaQA. Each configuration uses 60 fixed questions, 100 seeded 30/30 calibration-test partitions, five conformal target levels, and a no-conformal-prediction baseline. Across the six configurations, higher target levels are accompanied by higher observed full-support rates and reduced answer availability. At the 95% target, non-empty response coverage ranges from 17.23% to 60.17%, claim retention from 10.72% to 43.16%, and full support among non-empty outputs from 89.14% to 95.56%. We formulate the adaptive retrieval trajectory explicitly and characterize the reliability-informativeness trade-off when conformal factuality is applied after agent termination.
Figures & tables
Dimension
Multi-hop RAG
Agentic RAG
Follow-up query
Produced by a query-rewriting stage using prior evidence
Selected as the argument of an LLM-policy retrieve action
Retrieval control
Iterative refinement within a hop budget
Explicit retrieve / finish decision after accumulated evidence is inspected
Early termination
Configured hop/novel-evidence stopping conditions
Policy finish , repeated-query safeguards, or configured decision/retrieval limits
Evidence
Aggregated across a sequence of retrieval hops
Aggregated across adaptively selected retrieval actions
Table 1: Operational differences between the evaluated multi-hop and agentic retrieval procedures. Both apply post-generation claim scoring and conformal filtering.
Figure 1: Agentic RAG using the relevance-scoring formulation in eq. 7 , evaluated across GPT-6 Luna and Llama 3.1 8B on three QA datasets. The five points on each curve are the conformal targets 80%, 85%, 90%, 92.5%, and 95%; separate crosses at 100% non-empty coverage denote the no-CP baselines. The y-axis is response-level full support and includes vacuously supported empty filtered outputs. The vertically zoomed scale emphasizes reliability–coverage differences.
Model
Dataset
Non- empty
Claims retained
Supported claims
Full support ∣ non-empty
GPT-6 Luna
HotpotQA
36.47
23.57
97.14
95.23
NQ
17.23
10.72
90.16
89.14
TriviaQA
51.20
43.16
96.59
95.56
Llama 3.1 8B
HotpotQA
38.73
27.06
97.33
93.26
NQ
21.00
11.77
96.27
91.47
TriviaQA
60.17
39.13
97.72
94.56
Table 2: Agentic RAG using the relevance-scoring formulation in eq. 7 at the 95% CP target. All values are percentages averaged over 100 calibration–test partitions. “Full support ∣ non-empty” conditions on retaining at least one claim.
Appendix figures & tables3 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Dataset
Target
Non-empty
Claims retained
Supported claims
Fully supported ∣ non-empty
HotpotQA
No CP
100.00
100.00
87.68
81.40
80%
97.73
92.57
88.63
82.66
85%
88.30
73.98
91.51
86.41
90%
79.60
62.28
93.33
88.82
92.5%
67.30
49.10
95.08
91.50
95%
36.47
23.57
97.14
95.23
Appendix
Table 3: Agentic RAG with GPT-6 Luna using the relevance-scoring formulation in eq. 7 : no-CP baseline and complete conformal target sweep (%).
Dataset
Target
Non-empty
Claims retained
Supported claims
Fully supported ∣ non-empty
HotpotQA
No CP
100.00
100.00
87.98
70.87
80%
90.73
84.19
91.66
78.26
85%
83.17
69.32
94.54
84.82
90%
77.63
60.33
95.61
87.88
92.5%
72.17
52.62
96.73
91.13
95%
38.73
27.06
97.33
93.26
Appendix
Table 4: Agentic RAG with Llama 3.1 8B using the relevance-scoring formulation in eq. 7 : no-CP baseline and complete conformal target sweep (%).
Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) evaluation measures how well systems retrieve, use, and cite evidence while balancing reliability, cost, and speed.
Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) can ground large language models in external evidence, but retrieved context does not guarantee that generated claims are factually supported. This problem is especially relevant in multi-hop RAG, where retrieval and reasoning proceed through multiple dependent stages. We study whether claim-level conformal factuality control, previously developed for RAG, remains effective in this setting. We apply split-conformal claim filtering to multi-hop RAG and evaluate it on HotpotQA, Natural Questions, and TriviaQA using Llama 3.1 8B and GPT-4o-mini, together with a single-hop reference experiment. Across all six multi-hop model-dataset configurations, increasingly stringent conformal targets consistently increase the fraction of responses whose retained claims are fully supported. At the 95% target, this rate ranges from 95.80% to 97.20%, compared with 55.60%-76.03% without filtering. However, the improvement is strongly selective: only 4.41%-31.09% of generated claims are retained and 9.70%-51.40% of responses remain non-empty at the 95% target. These results show that conformal factuality extends to multi-hop RAG, while demonstrating that nominal reliability must be interpreted jointly with claim retention and abstention.
Muhammad Aimal Rehman, Chi-Kuang Yeh
Department of Mathematics & Statistics Georgia State University Atlanta, GA, USA
Incorporating specific knowledge into large language models via retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) is a widespread technique that fuels many of today's industry AI applications. A fundamental problem is to assess if the context retrieved by some similarity search provides indeed supporting facts, or instead misguides the generator with irrelevant information. It is critical to associate meaningful confidence measures about the factuality of the retrieval process with the generated answers. We present a new, two-staged approach to predict fact faithfulness of the output of retrieval-augmented generations. First, we employ conformal prediction to select only those retrieved chunks who have a high chance to come from the correct source. This approach in itself can improve answer quality by up to 6% in some of the studied datasets, however, the associated statistical guarantees do not hold generally, since the assumption of sample exchangeability depends on the retriever setup. We present diagnostic metrics to assess whether a setup is suitable. Second, we quantify confidence in the consistency of a generated final answer with a given retrieved context, using an attention-based factuality classifier. This approach can detect inconsistent answers with a chance of up to 77%. Our work helps to establish a novel type of certified RAG systems for a broad range of natural language industry applications.
Florian Geissler, Francesco Carella, Laura Fieback +1
Fraunhofer Institute for Cognitive Systems (IKS), Munich, Germany · Volkswagen AG, Wolfsburg, Germany
Large language models (LLMs) frequently hallucinate, limiting their reliability in knowledge-intensive applications. Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) and conformal factuality have emerged as potential ways to address this limitation. While RAG aims to ground responses in retrieved evidence, it provides no statistical guarantee that the final output is correct. Conformal factuality filtering offers distribution-free statistical reliability by scoring and filtering atomic claims using a threshold calibrated on held-out data, however, the informativeness of the final output is not guaranteed. We systematically analyze the reliability and usefulness of conformal factuality for RAG-based LLMs across generation, scoring, calibration, robustness, and efficiency. We propose novel informativeness-aware metrics that better reflect task utility under conformal filtering. Across three benchmarks and multiple model families, we find that (i) conformal filtering suffers from low usefulness at high factuality levels due to vacuous outputs, (ii) conformal factuality guarantee is not robust to distribution shifts and distractors, highlighting the limitation that requires calibration data to closely match deployment conditions, and (iii) lightweight entailment-based verifiers match or outperform LLM-based model confidence scorers while requiring over 100× fewer FLOPs. Overall, our results expose factuality-informativeness trade-offs and fragility of conformal filtering framework under distribution shifts and distractors, highlighting the need for new approaches for reliability with robustness and usefulness as key metrics, and provide actionable guidance for building RAG pipelines that are both reliable and computationally efficient.