Evidence-Grounded Generation

Follow this topic Ask about this topic

Evidence-grounded generation studies how language models can use documents, databases, images, and other sources to produce claims that readers can verify. Common approaches include retrieval-augmented generation, claim-level verification, evidence graphs, citation alignment, and abstention when support is insufficient. Benchmarks increasingly test not only answer accuracy but also whether each claim is supported by the cited evidence, including in medical, scientific, legal, and long-form tasks. A central challenge remains that retrieving relevant evidence does not ensure models will integrate it faithfully, and stricter grounding can trade off against coverage, fluency, or efficiency.

Latest papers

148 papers21 papers in the last four weeks, down 9% on the four weeks before. 0.1% of all new papers.

Apr 27, 2026

Dont Stop Early: Scalable Enterprise Deep Research with Controlled Information Flow and Evidence-Aware Termination

Enterprise deep research often fails to produce decision-ready reports due to uneven information coverage, context explosion, and premature stopping. We propose a scalable Enterprise Deep Research (EDR) architecture to address these failures. Our system (i) decomposes requests into coverage-driven objectives via outline generation with reflection, (ii) localizes context with dependency-guided execution and explicit information sharing, and (iii) enforces evidence-based completion criteria so agents iteratively collect information until sufficiency conditions are met. We evaluate on an internal sales enablement task and the public DeepResearch Bench benchmark, where our proposed system design achieves the strongest overall performance compared with competitive deep-research baselines. The results show that dependency-controlled context and explicit evidence sufficiency criteria reduce premature stopping and improve the consistency and depth of enterprise research outputs.

Prafulla Kumar Choubey, Kung-Hsiang Huang, Pranav Narayanan Venkit +5

Salesforce AI Research

Deep Research Agents LLM Agent Orchestration Evidence-Grounded Generation LLM Context Management

Apr 26, 2026

FinGround: Detecting and Grounding Financial Hallucinations via Atomic Claim Verification

Financial AI systems must produce answers grounded in specific regulatory filings, yet current LLMs fabricate metrics, invent citations, and miscalculate derived quantities. These errors carry direct regulatory consequences as the EU AI Act's high-risk enforcement deadline approaches (August 2026). Existing hallucination detectors treat all claims uniformly, missing 43% of computational errors that require arithmetic re-verification against structured tables. We present FinGround, a three-stage verify-then-ground pipeline for financial document QA. Stage 1 performs finance-aware hybrid retrieval over text and tables. Stage 2 decomposes answers into atomic claims classified by a six-type financial taxonomy and verified with type-routed strategies including formula reconstruction. Stage 3 rewrites unsupported claims with paragraph- and table-cell-level citations. To cleanly isolate verification value from retrieval quality, we propose retrieval-equalized evaluation as standard methodology for RAG verification research: when all systems receive identical retrieval, FinGround still reduces hallucination rates by 68% over the strongest baseline (

p < 0.01

). The full pipeline achieves a 78% reduction relative to GPT-4o. An 8B distilled detector retains 91.4% F1 at 18x lower per-claim latency, enabling $0.003/query deployment, supported by qualitative signals from a four-week analyst pilot.

Dongxin Guo, Jikun Wu, Siu Ming Yiu

1The University of Hong Kong · 2Stellaris AI Limited

LLM Answer Verification Financial QA LLM Hallucination Detection RAG Evaluation Evidence-Grounded Generation Finance

Apr 20, 2026

MedProbeBench: Systematic Benchmarking at Deep Evidence Integration for Expert-level Medical Guideline

Recent advances in deep research systems enable large language models to retrieve, synthesize, and reason over large-scale external knowledge. In medicine, developing clinical guidelines critically depends on such deep evidence integration. However, existing benchmarks fail to evaluate this capability in realistic workflows requiring multi-step evidence integration and expert-level judgment. To address this gap, we introduce MedProbeBench, the first benchmark leveraging high-quality clinical guidelines as expert-level references. Medical guidelines, with their rigorous standards in neutrality and verifiability, represent the pinnacle of medical expertise and pose substantial challenges for deep research agents. For evaluation, we propose MedProbe-Eval, a comprehensive evaluation framework featuring: (1) Holistic Rubrics with 1,200+ task-adaptive rubric criteria for comprehensive quality assessment, and (2) Fine-grained Evidence Verification for rigorous validation of evidence precision, grounded in 5,130+ atomic claims. Evaluation of 17 LLMs and deep research agents reveals critical gaps in evidence integration and guideline generation, underscoring the substantial distance between current capabilities and expert-level clinical guideline development. Project: https://github.com/uni-medical/MedProbeBench

Jiyao Liu, Jianghan Shen, Sida Song +19

Fudan University, Shanghai, China · Shanghai Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, Shanghai, China · Nanjing University, Nanjing, China +1

Healthcare AI Agent Benchmarks Evidence-Grounded Generation Clinical Language Model Evaluation

Apr 20, 2026

ArbGraph: Conflict-Aware Evidence Arbitration for Reliable Long-Form Retrieval-Augmented Generation

Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) remains unreliable in long-form settings, where retrieved evidence is noisy or contradictory, making it difficult for RAG pipelines to maintain factual consistency. Existing approaches focus on retrieval expansion or verification during generation, leaving conflict resolution entangled with generation. To address this limitation, we propose ArbGraph, a framework for pre-generation evidence arbitration in long-form RAG that explicitly resolves factual conflicts. ArbGraph decomposes retrieved documents into atomic claims and organizes them into a conflict-aware evidence graph with explicit support and contradiction relations. On top of this graph, we introduce an intensity-driven iterative arbitration mechanism that propagates credibility signals through evidence interactions, enabling the system to suppress unreliable and inconsistent claims before final generation. In this way, ArbGraph separates evidence validation from text generation and provides a coherent evidence foundation for downstream long-form generation. We evaluate ArbGraph on two widely used long-form RAG benchmarks, LongFact and RAGChecker, using multiple large language model backbones. Experimental results show that ArbGraph consistently improves factual recall and information density while reducing hallucinations and sensitivity to retrieval noise. Additional analyses show that these gains are evident under conflicting or ambiguous evidence, highlighting the effectiveness of evidence-level conflict resolution for improving the reliability of long-form RAG. The implementation is publicly available at https://github.com/1212Judy/ArbGraph.

Qingying Niu, Yuhao Wang, Ruiyang Ren +2

Gaoling School of Artificial Intelligence, Renmin University of China, Beijing, China, 100872 · Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA, 15213

Retrieval-Augmented Generation Evidence-Grounded Generation

Apr 20, 2026

Learning from AVA: Early Lessons from a Curated and Trustworthy Generative AI for Policy and Development Research

General-purpose LLMs pose misinformation risks for development and policy experts, lacking epistemic humility for verifiable outputs. We present AVA (AI + Verified Analysis), a GenAI platform built on a curated library of over 4,000 World Bank Reports with multilingual capabilities. AVA's multi-agent pipeline enables users to query and receive evidence-based syntheses. It operationalizes epistemic humility through two mechanisms: citation verifiability (tracing claims to sources) and reasoned abstention (declining unsupported queries with justification and redirection). We conducted an in-the-wild evaluation with over 2,200 individuals from heterogeneous organisations and roles in 116 countries, via log analysis, surveys, and 20 interviews. Difference-in-Differences estimates associate sustained engagement with 2.4-3.9 hours saved weekly. Qualitatively, participants used AVA as a specialized "evidence engine"; reasoned abstention clarified scope boundaries, and trust was calibrated through institutional provenance and page-anchored citations. We contribute design guidelines for specialized AI and articulate a vision for "ecosystem-aware" Humble AI.

Nimisha Karnatak, Mohamad Chatila, Daniel Alejandro Pinzón Hernández +3

University of Oxford · The World Bank Group · Nouswise, Inc.

Retrieval-Augmented Generation Evidence-Grounded Generation LLM Abstention Generative AI Evaluation

Apr 18, 2026

The Provenance Gap in Clinical AI: Evidence-Traceable Temporal Knowledge Graphs for Rare Disease Reasoning

Frontier large language models generate clinically accurate outputs, but their citations are often fabricated. We term this the Provenance Gap. We tested five frontier LLMs across 36 clinician-validated scenarios for three rare neuromuscular disease pairs. No model produced a clinically relevant PubMed identifier without prompting. When explicitly asked to cite, the best model achieved 15.3% relevant PMIDs; the majority resolved to real publications in unrelated fields. We present HEG-TKG (Hierarchical Evidence-Grounded Temporal Knowledge Graphs), a system that grounds clinical claims in temporal knowledge graphs built from 4,512 PubMed records and curated sources with quality-tier stratification and 1,280 disease-trajectory milestones. In a controlled three-arm comparison using the same synthesis model, HEG-TKG matches baseline clinical feature coverage while achieving 100% evidence verifiability with 203 inline citations. Guideline-RAG, given overlapping source documents as raw text, produces zero verifiable citations. LLM judges cannot distinguish fabricated from verified citations without PubMed audit data. Independent clinician evaluation confirms the verifiability advantage (Cohen's d = 1.81, p < 0.001) with no degradation on safety or completeness. A counterfactual experiment shows 80% resistance to injected clinical errors with 100% detectability via citation trace. The system deploys on-premise via open-source models so patient data never leaves institutional infrastructure.

Md Shamim Ahmed, Maja Dusanic, Moritz Nikolai Kirschner +4

Department of Mathematics and Computer Science, University of Southern Denmark, Campusvej 55, 5230 Odense, Denmark · Universitätsmedizin Göttingen, Robert-Koch-Straße 40, 37075 Göttingen, Germany

Data Provenance Healthcare Citation Verification Clinical Reasoning Evidence-Grounded Generation Temporal KGs+1

Apr 16, 2026

DeepER-Med: Advancing Deep Evidence-Based Research in Medicine Through Agentic AI

Trustworthiness and transparency are essential for the clinical adoption of artificial intelligence (AI) in healthcare and biomedical research. Recent deep research systems aim to accelerate evidence-grounded scientific discovery by integrating AI agents with multi-hop information retrieval, reasoning, and synthesis. However, most existing systems lack explicit and inspectable criteria for evidence appraisal, creating a risk of compounding errors and making it difficult for researchers and clinicians to assess the reliability of their outputs. In parallel, current benchmarking approaches rarely evaluate performance on complex, real-world medical questions. Here, we introduce DeepER-Med, a Deep Evidence-based Research framework for Medicine with an agentic AI system. DeepER-Med frames deep medical research as an explicit and inspectable workflow of evidence-based generation, consisting of three modules: research planning, agentic collaboration, and evidence synthesis. To support realistic evaluation, we also present DeepER-MedQA, an evidence-grounded dataset comprising 100 expert-level research questions derived from authentic medical research scenarios and curated by a multidisciplinary panel of 11 biomedical experts. Expert manual evaluation demonstrates that DeepER-Med consistently outperforms widely used production-grade platforms across multiple criteria, including the generation of novel scientific insights. We further demonstrate the practical utility of DeepER-Med through eight real-world clinical cases. Human clinician assessment indicates that DeepER-Med's conclusions align with clinical recommendations in seven cases, highlighting its potential for medical research and decision support.

Zhizheng Wang, Chih-Hsuan Wei, Joey Chan +19

Division of Intramural Research (DIR), National Library of Medicine (NLM), National Institutes of Health (NIH), Bethesda, MD 20892, USA · Hunterian Neurosurgical Laboratory, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21231, USA · Cancer Data Science Laboratory, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute (NCI), National Institutes of Health (NIH), Bethesda, MD 20892, USA +7

Deep Research Agents Healthcare Clinical Decision Support Biomedical QA Medical QA Evidence-Grounded Generation

Apr 14, 2026

InfiniteScienceGym: An Unbounded, Procedurally-Generated Benchmark for Scientific Analysis

Large language models are emerging as scientific assistants, but evaluating their ability to reason from empirical data remains challenging. Benchmarks derived from published studies and human annotations inherit publication bias, known-knowledge bias, label noise, and substantial storage requirements. We present InfiniteScienceGym, a procedurally generated benchmark of scientific repositories paired with a verifiable question-answering task. From a seed, the simulator deterministically generates a self-contained repository with realistic directory structure, files, and tabular data, and a privileged QA generator produces both answerable and unanswerable questions with exact ground truth. This makes it possible to evaluate evidence-grounded reasoning, abstention, and tool-mediated analysis in a controlled setting without distributing a large static corpus. InfiniteScienceGym complements real scientific benchmarks by targeting blind spots and failure modes that are hard to evaluate using published datasets alone. Evaluating both proprietary and open-weight models, we find that none achieve more than 50% accuracy overall, that recognizing unanswerable questions remains a major weakness, and that stronger models tend to use tools more effectively rather than simply consuming more tokens.

Oliver Bentham, Vivek Srikumar

Kahlert School of Computing University of Utah

LLM Evaluation Scientific Agent Benchmarks Scientific QA Synthetic Benchmark Generation Evidence-Grounded Generation

Apr 14, 2026

Multi-Persona Debate System for Automated Scientific Hypothesis Generation

Modern scientific discovery is bottlenecked not by data scarcity, but by the inability to synthesize fragmented knowledge into actionable hypotheses. This challenge is especially acute in battery materials research, where electrochemical performance, interfacial behavior, and manufacturing feasibility must be optimized simultaneously. Here, we present the Multi-Persona Debate System (MPDS), a literature-grounded framework for automated scientific hypothesis generation that combines literature retrieval, long-context large language model reasoning, corpus-driven persona induction, and structured multi-agent debate. MPDS constructs literature snapshots of up to 500 papers, grounds agents in role-specific evidence pools, and conducts a three-round citation-aware debate followed by moderator synthesis, enabling negotiation between personas while preserving evidence traceability. We evaluate MPDS using a temporally controlled protocol excluding direct access to target papers, including two held-out battery-materials case studies and a blinded comparison across 30 matched cases. In sodium-ion anode and all-solid-state battery cathode design tasks, MPDS recovered design logics aligned with experimentally validated solution spaces and generated more mechanistically explicit, process-aware proposals than simpler baselines. To assess the impact of personas and debate, we introduce Integrative Hypothesis Quality scoring. In ablation studies, MPDS achieved the highest mean score among five conditions, with its largest advantage in cross-perspective integration. A laboratory follow-up suggests utility as a diagnostic aid for identifying practical bottlenecks in workflows. These results indicate that structured debate over literature snapshots improves hypothesis formation under coupled engineering constraints and provides a reusable workflow for text-intensive scientific discovery.

Jaeha Oh, Byungchan Kim, Ju Li +2

Department of Materials Science & Engineering, Ajou University, Suwon 16499, Republic of Korea · Department of Energy Systems Research, Ajou University, Suwon 16499, Republic of Korea · Department of Nuclear Science and Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02139, USA +3

Scientific Hypothesis Generation Evidence-Grounded Generation Multi-Agent Debate

Apr 11, 2026

ClinicBot: A Guideline-Grounded Clinical Chatbot with Prioritized Evidence RAG and Verifiable Citations

Clinical diagnosis requires answers that are accurate, verifiable, and explicitly grounded in official guidelines. While large language models excel at natural language processing, their tendency to hallucinate undermines their utility in high-stakes medical contexts where precision is essential. Existing retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) systems treat all evidence equally, producing noisy context and generic answers misaligned with clinical practice. We present ClinicBot, an AI system that translates guideline recommendations into trustworthy clinical support through three key advances: (1) structured extraction of clinical guidelines into semantic units (recommendations, tables, definitions, narrative) with explicit provenance, (2) evidence prioritization that ranks content by clinical significance and guideline structure rather than textual similarity, and (3) a web-based interface that presents concise, actionable answers with verifiable evidence. We will demonstrate ClinicBot using diabetes questions from real patients and an additional diabetes risk assessment tool that is faithful to the American Diabetes Association (ADA) Standards of Care in Diabetes (2025). The demonstration will illustrate how semantic knowledge extraction and hierarchical evidence ranking can reliably operate in a multi-agent setting to process complex clinical guidelines at scale.

Navapat Nananukul, Mayank Kejriwal

USC Information Sciences Institute, Los Angeles, California, USA

Clinical QA Evidence-Grounded Generation Clinical Decision Support Agentic RAG Clinical Information Extraction

Apr 10, 2026

Facet-Level Tracing of Evidence Uncertainty and Hallucination in RAG

Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) aims to reduce hallucination by grounding answers in retrieved evidence, yet hallucinated answers remain common even when relevant documents are available. Existing evaluations focus on answer-level or passage-level accuracy, offering limited insight into how evidence is used during generation. In this work, we introduce a facet-level diagnostics framework for QA that decomposes each input question into atomic reasoning facets. For each facet, we assess evidence sufficiency and grounding using a structured Facet x Chunk matrix that combines retrieval relevance with natural language inference-based faithfulness scores. To diagnose evidence usage, we analyze three controlled inference modes: Strict RAG, which enforces exclusive reliance on retrieved evidence; Soft RAG, which allows integration of retrieved evidence and parametric knowledge; and LLM-only generation without retrieval. Comparing these modes enables thorough analysis of retrieval-generation misalignment, defined as cases where relevant evidence is retrieved but not correctly integrated during generation. Across medical QA and HotpotQA, we evaluate three open-source and closed-source LLMs (GPT, Gemini, and LLaMA), providing interpretable diagnostics that reveal recurring facet-level failure modes, including evidence absence, evidence misalignment, and prior-driven overrides. Our results demonstrate that hallucinations in RAG systems are driven less by retrieval accuracy and more by how retrieved evidence is integrated during generation, with facet-level analysis exposing systematic evidence override and misalignment patterns that remain hidden under answer-level evaluation.

Passant Elchafei, Monorama Swain, Shahed Masoudian +1

Johannes Kepler University Linz, Institute of Computational Perception, Linz, Austria · Linz Institute of Technology, Artificial Intelligence Lab, Austria

Hallucination in RAG RAG Evaluation Evidence-Grounded Generation

Apr 7, 2026

MedConclusion: A Benchmark for Biomedical Conclusion Generation from Structured Abstracts

Large language models (LLMs) are widely explored for reasoning-intensive research tasks, yet resources for testing whether they can infer scientific conclusions from structured biomedical evidence remain limited. We introduce

\textbf{MedConclusion}

, a large-scale dataset of

\textbf{5.7M}

PubMed structured abstracts for biomedical conclusion generation. Each instance pairs the non-conclusion sections of an abstract with the original author-written conclusion, providing naturally occurring supervision for evidence-to-conclusion reasoning. MedConclusion also includes journal-level metadata such as biomedical category and SJR, enabling subgroup analysis across biomedical domains. As an initial study, we evaluate diverse LLMs under conclusion and summary prompting settings and score outputs with both reference-based metrics and LLM-as-a-judge. We find that conclusion writing is behaviorally distinct from summary writing, strong models remain closely clustered under current automatic metrics, and judge identity can substantially shift absolute scores. MedConclusion provides a reusable data resource for studying scientific evidence-to-conclusion reasoning. Our code and data are available at: https://github.com/Harvard-AI-and-Robotics-Lab/MedConclusion.

Weiyue Li, Ruizhi Qian, Yi Li +5

Evidence-Grounded Generation Scientific Reasoning in Language Models

Apr 5, 2026

Compliance-by-Construction Argument Graphs: Using Generative AI to Produce Evidence-Linked Formal Arguments for Certification-Grade Accountability

High-stakes decision systems increasingly require structured justification, traceability, and auditability to ensure accountability and regulatory compliance. Formal arguments commonly used in the certification of safety-critical systems provide a mechanism for structuring claims, reasoning, and evidence in a verifiable manner. At the same time, generative artificial intelligence systems are increasingly integrated into decision-support workflows, assisting with drafting explanations, summarizing evidence, and generating recommendations. However, current deployments often rely on language models as loosely constrained assistants, which introduces risks such as hallucinated reasoning, unsupported claims, and weak traceability. This paper proposes a compliance-by-construction architecture that integrates Generative AI (GenAI) with structured formal argument representations. The approach treats each AI-assisted step as a claim that must be supported by verifiable evidence and validated against explicit reasoning constraints before it becomes part of an official decision record. The architecture combines four components: i) a typed Argument Graph representation inspired by assurance-case methods, ii) retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) to draft argument fragments grounded in authoritative evidence, iii) a reasoning and validation kernel enforcing completeness and admissibility constraints, and iv) a provenance ledger aligned with the W3C PROV standard to support auditability. We present a system design and an evaluation strategy based on enforceable invariants and worked examples. The analysis suggests that deterministic validation rules can prevent unsupported claims from entering the decision record while allowing GenAI to accelerate argument construction.

Mahyar T. Moghaddam

SDU Software Engineering, Odense, Denmark

AI Accountability AI Assurance Evidence-Grounded Generation Computational Argumentation

Apr 4, 2026

Parallel LLM Reasoning for Bias-Resilient, Robust Conceptual Abstraction

Large language models (LLMs) have been increasingly used to analyze text. However, they are often plagued with contextual reasoning limitations when analyzing long documents. When long documents are processed sequentially, early or dominant concepts can overshadow less visible but meaningful interpretations, leading to cumulative analytical bias, omission error, and over-generalization. Additionally, independently generated outputs are often merged without systematic grounding, introducing redundancy, conceptual drift, and unsupported claims. This study proposes a structured framework combining parallel chunk-level processing with evidence-anchored consolidation. Texts are first divided into semantically coherent chunks and processed independently in parallel to remove influence from earlier processing. The independently generated interpretations are then consolidated using explicit evidence anchoring and prioritization that reduces dominance and over-generalization while improving traceability. Experiments with multiple model types and sizes indicate that parallel processing significantly reduces omission error by approximately 84%, increases evidence traceability by up to 130%, and reduces unsupported claims by up to 91%. Smaller models benefited most, suggesting that efficient parallel chunking and consolidation play a critical role in achieving reliable and scalable textual analysis.

Aisvarya Adeseye, Jouni Isoaho, Adeyemi Adeseye

University of Turku, Turku, Finland · Brilloconnetz Partners avoin yhtiö, Turku, Finland

Long-Context Reasoning in Language Models Parallel Reasoning in Language Models Language Model Robustness Evidence-Grounded Generation

Apr 3, 2026

LitPivot: Developing Well-Situated Research Ideas Through Dynamic Contextualization and Critique within the Literature Landscape

Developing a novel research idea is hard. It must be distinct enough from prior work to claim a contribution while also building on it. This requires iteratively reviewing literature and refining an idea based on what a researcher reads; yet when an idea changes, the literature that matters often changes with it. Most tools offer limited support for this interplay: literature tools help researchers understand a fixed body of work, while ideation tools evaluate ideas against a static, pre-curated set of papers. We introduce literature-initiated pivots, a mechanism where engagement with literature prompts revision to a developing idea, and where that revision changes which literature is relevant. We operationalize this in LitPivot, where researchers concurrently draft and vet an idea. LitPivot dynamically retrieves clusters of papers relevant to a selected part of the idea and proposes literature-informed critiques for how to revise it. A lab study (

n{=}17

) shows researchers produced higher-rated ideas with stronger self-reported understanding of the literature space; an open-ended study (

n{=}5

) reveals how researchers use LitPivot to iteratively evolve their own ideas.

Hita Kambhamettu, Bhavana Dalvi Mishra, Andrew Head +4

University of Pennsylvania Philadelphia, USA · Allen Institute for AI Seattle, USA

Research Idea Generation AI-Assisted Scientific Research Evidence-Grounded Generation

Apr 1, 2026

Are Finer Citations Always Better? Rethinking Granularity for Attributed Generation

Citation granularity -- whether to cite individual sentences, paragraphs, or documents -- is a critical design choice in attributed generation. While fine-grained citations are commonly preferred for precise human verification, their impact on model performance remains under-explored. We analyze four model scales (8B-120B) and demonstrate that enforcing fine-grained (sentence-level) citations forfeits gains of 2-97% (median 40%) relative to the best-performing granularity, and up to 338% on individual tasks. Strikingly, setting citation granularity to its optimal value (based on attribution quality) unlocks these substantial gains while leaving overall answer correctness essentially unchanged (between -2.3% and +4.4%). We observe a consistent pattern where attribution quality peaks at intermediate (paragraph-level) granularities: finer citations appear to sever the semantic dependencies needed to ground a claim, while excessively coarse citations introduce distracting noise. Importantly, this performance gap varies with scale: when a claim rests on a small or moderate amount of evidence, it disproportionately penalizes larger models by disrupting the multi-sentence information synthesis at which they excel. Fine-grained citation rests on the premise that a sentence is a sufficient unit of evidence on its own. Our results indicate that it often is not, and that this is a property of the model rather than of the citation standard. Standards fixed for human verifiability may therefore paradoxically degrade the very attribution they aim to ensure; effective attribution requires matching granularity to the model's semantic scope rather than fixing it by convention.

Hexuan Wang, Jingyu Zhang, Benjamin Van Durme +1

Department of Computer Science, Johns Hopkins University

LLM Evaluation LLM Grounding Evidence-Grounded Generation

Mar 30, 2026

CrossTrace: A Cross-Domain Dataset of Grounded Scientific Reasoning Traces for Hypothesis Generation

Scientific hypothesis generation is a critical bottleneck in accelerating research, yet existing datasets for training and evaluating hypothesis-generating models are limited to single domains and lack explicit reasoning traces connecting prior knowledge to novel contributions. I introduce CrossTrace, a dataset of 1,389 grounded scientific reasoning traces spanning biomedical research (518), AI/ML (605), and cross-domain work (266). Each trace captures the structured reasoning chain from established knowledge through intermediate logical steps to a novel hypothesis, with every step grounded in source paper text. I define an Input/Trace/Output schema that extends the Bit-Flip-Spark framework of HypoGen with step-level verification, a taxonomy of eight discovery patterns, and multi-domain coverage. Fine-tuning Qwen2.5-7B-Instruct on CrossTrace via QLoRA yields substantial improvements over the untuned baseline: IAScore rises from 0.828 to 0.968 (GPT-4o judge) and from 0.716 to 0.888 (Claude Opus 4.5), structural compliance improves from 0% to 100%, and spark cosine similarity increases from 0.221 to 0.620. Balanced cross-domain training (biomedical + AI/ML + CS) outperforms single-domain training, providing evidence that scientific reasoning patterns transfer across disciplines. Human validation of 150 stratified records confirms 99.7% step-level grounding accuracy and a 0.0% fabrication rate. To my knowledge, CrossTrace is the first large-scale, cross-domain dataset with step-level grounded reasoning traces for hypothesis generation, and my results demonstrate that such traces are an effective training signal whose benefits are at least partially domain-general.

Andrew Bouras, OMS-II Research Fellow

Nova Southeastern University Dr. Kiran C. Patel College of Osteopathic Medicine Clearwater, FL 33760, USA

Scientific Hypothesis Generation Scientific Reasoning in Language Models Scientific Reasoning Evidence-Grounded Generation Cross-Domain Generalization

Mar 30, 2026

Towards a Medical AI Scientist

Autonomous systems that generate scientific hypotheses, conduct experiments, and draft manuscripts have recently emerged as a promising paradigm for accelerating discovery. However, existing AI Scientists remain largely domain-agnostic, limiting their applicability to clinical medicine, where research is required to be grounded in medical evidence with specialized data modalities. In this work, we introduce Medical AI Scientist, the first autonomous research framework tailored to clinical autonomous research. It enables clinically grounded ideation by transforming extensively surveyed literature into actionable evidence through clinician-engineer co-reasoning mechanism, which improves the traceability of generated research ideas. It further facilitates evidence-grounded manuscript drafting guided by structured medical compositional conventions and ethical policies. The framework operates under 3 research modes, namely paper-based reproduction, literature-inspired innovation, and task-driven exploration, each corresponding to a distinct level of automated scientific inquiry with progressively increasing autonomy. Comprehensive evaluations by both large language models and human experts demonstrate that the ideas generated by the Medical AI Scientist are of substantially higher quality than those produced by commercial LLMs across 171 cases, 19 clinical tasks, and 6 data modalities. Meanwhile, our system achieves strong alignment between the proposed method and its implementation, while also demonstrating significantly higher success rates in executable experiments. Double-blind evaluations by human experts and the Stanford Agentic Reviewer suggest that the generated manuscripts approach MICCAI-level quality, while consistently surpassing those from ISBI and BIBM. The proposed Medical AI Scientist highlights the potential of leveraging AI for autonomous scientific discovery in healthcare.

Hongtao Wu, Boyun Zheng, Dingjie Song +5

The Chinese University of Hong Kong · Lehigh University · Microsoft Research +1

AI Agents for Scientific Discovery Scientific Hypothesis Generation Evidence-Grounded Generation

Mar 29, 2026

ESGLens: An LLM-Based RAG Framework for Interactive ESG Report Analysis and Score Prediction

Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) reports are central to investment decision-making, yet their length, heterogeneous content, and lack of standardized structure make manual analysis costly and inconsistent. We present ESGLens, a proof-of-concept framework combining retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) with prompt-engineered extraction to automate three tasks: (1)~structured information extraction guided by Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) standards, (2)interactive question-answering with source traceability, and (3)ESG score prediction via regression on LLM-generated embeddings. ESGLens is purpose-built for the domain: a report-processing module segments heterogeneous PDF content into typed chunks (text, tables, charts); a GRI-guided extraction module retrieves and synthesizes information aligned with specific standards; and a scoring module embeds extracted summaries and feeds them to a regression model trained against London Stock Exchange Group (LSEG) reference scores. We evaluate the framework on approximately 300 reports from companies in the QQQ, S&P500, and Russell1000 indices (fiscal year 2022). Among three embedding methods (ChatGPT, BERT, RoBERTa) and two regressors (Neural Network, LightGBM), ChatGPT embeddings with a Neural Network achieve a Pearson correlation of 0.48 (

R^{2} \approx 0.23

) against LSEG ground-truth scores -- a modest but statistically meaningful signal given the

{\sim}300

-report training set and restriction to the environmental pillar. A traceability audit shows that 8 of 10 extracted claims verify against the source document, with two failures attributable to few-shot example leakage. We discuss limitations including dataset size and restriction to environmental indicators, and release the code to support reproducibility.

Tsung-Yu Yang, Meng-Chi Chen

Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Document Information Extraction Evidence-Grounded Generation Retrieval-Augmented Generation

Mar 28, 2026

PubMed Reasoner: Dynamic Reasoning-based Retrieval for Evidence-Grounded Biomedical Question Answering

Trustworthy biomedical question answering (QA) systems must not only provide accurate answers but also justify them with current, verifiable evidence. Retrieval-augmented approaches partially address this gap but lack mechanisms to iteratively refine poor queries, whereas self-reflection methods kick in only after full retrieval is completed. In this context, we introduce PubMed Reasoner, a biomedical QA agent composed of three stages: self-critic query refinement evaluates MeSH terms for coverage, alignment, and redundancy to enhance PubMed queries based on partial (metadata) retrieval; reflective retrieval processes articles in batches until sufficient evidence is gathered; and evidence-grounded response generation produces answers with explicit citations. PubMed Reasoner with a GPT-4o backbone achieves 78.32% accuracy on PubMedQA, slightly surpassing human experts, and showing consistent gains on MMLU Clinical Knowledge. Moreover, LLM-as-judge evaluations prefer our responses across: reasoning soundness, evidence grounding, clinical relevance, and trustworthiness. By orchestrating retrieval-first reasoning over authoritative sources, our approach provides practical assistance to clinicians and biomedical researchers while controlling compute and token costs.

Yiqing Zhang, Xiaozhong Liu, Fabricio Murai

PayPal · Worcester Polytechnic Institute

Biomedical QA Agentic RAG Evidence-Grounded Generation Adaptive Retrieval Biomedical IR

Mar 25, 2026

Dialogue to Question Generation for Evidence-based Medical Guideline Agent Development

Evidence-based medicine (EBM) is central to high-quality care, but remains difficult to implement in fast-paced primary care settings. Physicians face short consultations, increasing patient loads, and lengthy guideline documents that are impractical to consult in real time. To address this gap, we investigate the feasibility of using large language models (LLMs) as ambient assistants that surface targeted, evidence-based questions during physician-patient encounters. Our study focuses on question generation rather than question answering, with the aim of scaffolding physician reasoning and integrating guideline-based practice into brief consultations. We implemented two prompting strategies, a zero-shot baseline and a multi-stage reasoning variant, using Gemini 2.5 as the backbone model. We evaluated on a benchmark of 80 de-identified transcripts from real clinical encounters, with six experienced physicians contributing over 90 hours of structured review. Results indicate that while general-purpose LLMs are not yet fully reliable, they can produce clinically meaningful and guideline-relevant questions, suggesting significant potential to reduce cognitive burden and make EBM more actionable at the point of care.

Zongliang Ji, Ziyang Zhang, Xincheng Tan +5

Google Research · University of Toronto, Canada · Vector Institute, Canada +1

Clinical Decision Support Evidence-Grounded Generation Medical LLMs LLM Prompting

Mar 21, 2026

PAVE: Premise-Aware Validation and Editing for Retrieval-Augmented LLMs

Retrieval-augmented language models can retrieve relevant evidence yet still commit to answers before explicitly checking whether the retrieved context supports the conclusion. We present PAVE (Premise-Grounded Answer Validation and Editing), an inference-time validation layer for evidence-grounded question answering. PAVE decomposes retrieved context into question-conditioned atomic facts, drafts an answer, scores how well that draft is supported by the extracted premises, and revises low-support outputs before finalization. The resulting trace makes answer commitment auditable at the level of explicit premises, support scores, and revision decisions. In controlled ablations with a fixed retriever and backbone, PAVE outperforms simpler post-retrieval baselines in two evidence-grounded QA settings, with the largest gain reaching 32.7 accuracy points on a span-grounded benchmark. We view these findings as proof-of-concept evidence that explicit premise extraction plus support-gated revision can strengthen evidence-grounded consistency in retrieval-augmented LLM systems.

Tianyi Huang, Caden Yang, Emily Yin +2

Ryquo · App-In Club

Evidence-Grounded QA LLM Answer Verification Retrieval-Augmented Generation Evidence-Grounded Generation Knowledge-Intensive QA

Mar 14, 2026

sebis at ArchEHR-QA 2026: How Much Can You Do Locally? Evaluating Grounded EHR QA on a Single Notebook

Clinical question answering over electronic health records (EHRs) can help clinicians and patients access relevant medical information more efficiently. However, many recent approaches rely on large cloud-based models, which are difficult to deploy in clinical environments due to privacy constraints and computational requirements. In this work, we investigate how far grounded EHR question answering can be pushed when restricted to a single notebook. We participate in all four subtasks of the ArchEHR-QA 2026 shared task and evaluate several approaches designed to run on commodity hardware. All experiments are conducted locally without external APIs or cloud infrastructure. Our results show that such systems can achieve competitive performance on the shared task leaderboards. In particular, our submissions perform above average in two subtasks, and we observe that smaller models can approach the performance of much larger systems when properly configured. These findings suggest that privacy-preserving EHR QA systems running fully locally are feasible with current models and commodity hardware. The source code is available at https://github.com/ibrahimey/ArchEHR-QA-2026.

Ibrahim Ebrar Yurt, Fabian Karl, Tejaswi Choppa +1

Technical University of Munich, School of Computation, Information and Technology, Germany

EHR QA Clinical QA Evidence-Grounded Generation Privacy-Preserving Language Models

Mar 11, 2026

Coverage-Controlled Preference Mining from Noisy Claim Verification for Evidence-Grounded Generation

Evidence-grounded generation produces summaries whose claims should be supported by supplied evidence, but claim-level verifiers provide noisy feedback and can reward models that simply say less. We study this problem in clinical Brief Hospital Course summarization, where outputs must remain grounded in patient-specific EHR evidence. We introduce VERI-DPO, a preference-mining framework that converts noisy claim verification into coverage-controlled summary-level preferences. For each evidence-window prompt, VERI-DPO samples multiple candidate summaries, decomposes them into claims, verifies each claim against patient evidence, and forms a preference pair only when the chosen summary has better aggregate verifier-estimated support while retaining comparable verifiable content. Standard Direct Preference Optimization then distills these pairs into a single-sample policy, avoiding inference-time reranking. On patient-disjoint MIMIC-III-Ext-VeriFact-BHC test data, VERI-DPO reduces Not Supported rates from 10.7% to 1.9% under the mining verifier and from 11.6% to 6.4% under a separately prompted GPT-4o judge. In 100 blinded pairwise assessments by two domain researchers, VERI-DPO is preferred over the base model 56 times versus 18 times for factual faithfulness. In a locked zero-shot MIMIC-IV-Ext-BHC transfer test with 1,000 patients and no model adaptation, VERI-DPO lowers Not Supported rates with nearly unchanged scored-claim counts. Multi-seed ablations show that verifier-guided pair construction drives the gains, while coverage and anti-degeneration controls prevent apparent factuality improvements from coming from shorter or less checkable outputs.

Weixin Liu, Congning Ni, Qingyuan Song +4

Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA · Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA · Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA, USA

Claim Verification Healthcare Factual Consistency Evaluation Text Summarization Evidence-Grounded Generation

Mar 4, 2026

Coordinated Semantic Alignment and Evidence Constraints for Retrieval-Augmented Generation with Large Language Models

Retrieval augmented generation mitigates limitations of large language models in factual consistency and knowledge updating by introducing external knowledge. However, practical applications still suffer from semantic misalignment between retrieved results and generation objectives, as well as insufficient evidence utilization. To address these challenges, this paper proposes a retrieval augmented generation method that integrates semantic alignment with evidence constraints through coordinated modeling of retrieval and generation stages. The method first represents the relevance between queries and candidate evidence within a unified semantic space. This ensures that retrieved results remain semantically consistent with generation goals and reduces interference from noisy evidence and semantic drift. On this basis, an explicit evidence constraint mechanism is introduced. Retrieved evidence is transformed from an implicit context into a core control factor in generation. This restricts the expression scope of generated content and strengthens dependence on evidence. By jointly modeling semantic consistency and evidence constraints within a unified framework, the proposed approach improves factual reliability and verifiability while preserving natural language fluency. Comparative results show stable improvements across multiple generation quality metrics. This confirms the effectiveness and necessity of coordinated semantic alignment and evidence constraint modeling in retrieval augmented generation tasks.

Xin Chen, Saili Uday Gadgil, Jiarong Qiu

Cornell University, Ithaca, USA · Virginia polytechnic institute and state University, Blacksburg, USA · University of Southern California, Los Angeles, USA

Retrieval-Augmented Generation Evidence-Grounded Generation RAG Robustness

Feb 17, 2026

Evidence-Grounded Subspecialty Reasoning: Evaluating a Curated Clinical Intelligence Layer on the 2025 Endocrinology Board-Style Examination

Background: Large language models have demonstrated strong performance on general medical examinations, but subspecialty clinical reasoning remains challenging due to rapidly evolving guidelines and nuanced evidence hierarchies. Methods: We evaluated January Mirror, an evidence-grounded clinical reasoning system, against frontier LLMs (GPT-5, GPT-5.2, Gemini-3-Pro) on a 120-question endocrinology board-style examination. Mirror integrates a curated endocrinology and cardiometabolic evidence corpus with a structured reasoning architecture to generate evidence-linked outputs. Mirror operated under a closed-evidence constraint without external retrieval. Comparator LLMs had real-time web access to guidelines and primary literature. Results: Mirror achieved 87.5% accuracy (105/120; 95% CI: 80.4-92.3%), exceeding a human reference of 62.3% and frontier LLMs including GPT-5.2 (74.6%), GPT-5 (74.0%), and Gemini-3-Pro (69.8%). On the 30 most difficult questions (human accuracy less than 50%), Mirror achieved 76.7% accuracy. Top-2 accuracy was 92.5% for Mirror versus 85.25% for GPT-5.2. Conclusions: Mirror provided evidence traceability: 74.2% of outputs cited at least one guideline-tier source, with 100% citation accuracy on manual verification. Curated evidence with explicit provenance can outperform unconstrained web retrieval for subspecialty clinical reasoning and supports auditability for clinical deployment.

Amir Hosseinian, MohammadReza Zare Shahneh, Umer Mansoor +3

January AI · Stanford University

Clinical Language Model Evaluation Evidence-Grounded Reasoning Clinical Reasoning Clinical QA Evidence-Grounded Generation

Jan 6, 2026

MAPLE: Medical Aspect-Based Summarization with Phrase-Level Evidence

Trustworthy clinical summarization requires every claim to be traceable to its evidence, yet existing attribution often resolves only to the sentence or document, leaving clinicians to scan surrounding text for the few words that matter. We argue that the unit of attribution should match the unit of verification: the precise phrase the reader's eye must land on. We present MAPLE (Medical Aspect-Based Summarization with Phrase-Level Evidence), a human-annotated benchmark that grounds each summarized claim in both cited sentences and contributory phrases within them. Spanning 152 randomized controlled trial (RCT) abstracts and 16 clinically motivated aspects, MAPLE comprises 1,799 aspect-based summaries with two-level evidence. We further introduce a decoupled evaluation framework that separately scores content, traceability, and locatability, together with a proxy for the amount of source text a clinician must inspect to verify a claim. Benchmarking eleven LLMs shows that sentence-level citation is consistently strong (C-F1 up to 90.9%), while phrase-level grounding remains less stable and the most discriminative axis across models (P-F1 66.1-84.5%). These results suggest that the key challenge is not only producing accurate summaries, but localizing their supporting evidence precisely enough for efficient clinical verification. Data and code are available at https://github.com/chubohao/maple.

Bohao Chu, Hendrik Damm, Tabea M. G. Pakull +5

University of Duisburg-Essen · University of Applied Sciences and Arts Dortmund · University Hospital Essen +1

Healthcare Text Summarization Summarization Evaluation Evidence-Grounded Generation Clinical Language Model Evaluation

May 3, 2024

OARelatedWork: A Large-Scale Dataset of Related Work Sections with Full-texts from Open Access Sources

This paper introduces OARelatedWork: a dataset for related work generation from open-access sources. It is the first large-scale multi-document summarization dataset for related work generation, containing whole related work sections and full texts of cited papers. Its validation and test splits are constructed so that every source paper is available in full text, enabling controlled evaluation of full-text related work generation. The dataset includes 94 450 papers from multiple domains. With OARelatedWork, we aim to shift the field from generating parts of related work sections from abstracts only to generating entire related work sections from all available content. We (i) benchmark a wide spectrum of models, highlighting that synthesizing massive full-text contexts remains challenge for tested cost-effective Large Language Models (LLMs): under our statement-level judge, GPT-4o-mini's evidence-grounded True rate drops from 92.9% with abstracts to 83.8% with full texts. We (ii) empirically analyze human writing behavior through a human evaluation over 40 papers and 408 factual statements, revealing that authors frequently introduce abstractive claims ungrounded in localized source texts; consequently, tested LLMs actually surpass human baselines in strict, evidence-grounded factuality. Finally, we (iii) conduct a fine-grained meta-evaluation, revealing that standard reference-based metrics are inadequate for evaluating such long-form structured outputs, and introduce a robust statement-level evaluation framework to address this gap.

Martin Docekal, Martin Fajcik, Pavel Smrz

Brno University of Technology

Text Summarization Evidence-Grounded Generation Language Model Generation Evaluation