Evidence Selection

Follow this topic Ask about this topic

Momentum

5 papers in the last four weeks, against 1 the four weeks before. 0.0% of all new papers.

Jul 13Week of Sep 28

Latest papers 35

Oct 8, 2026cs.CV

MiniVer-V: Identifying Minimal Sufficient Evidence for Short Video Verification

A core challenge in short-video fact-checking is identifying which evidence is sufficient to support a verification conclusion. Existing approaches either give the verifier all available evidence, introducing noise, or select evidence by topical relevance, which conflates relatedness with sufficiency. We identify evidential sufficiency as the selection criterion: whether a subset of evidence is adequate to support a confident verdict without redundancy. We introduce MiniVer-V, a benchmark of 195 short videos with three-way verdict annotations (supported, refuted, insufficient) and 5,510 multimodal evidence units spanning visual keyframes, speech transcripts, and web-retrieved external sources. We propose a two-layer verification framework that separates claim-video consistency, assessed from internal evidence, from factual verdict determination, which additionally requires external corroboration. On top of it, a sufficiency-driven greedy search assembles evidence until a sufficiency threshold is met and outputs insufficient when the candidate pool is exhausted, rather than forcing a verdict. With Claude Sonnet 4, the method reaches a Macro-F1 of 0.510 using 4.5 evidence units on average (16% of the full evidence set), statistically indistinguishable from the full-evidence baseline (0.518 with 27.7 units), while significantly improving recognition of insufficient cases over the same search without abstention. The efficiency result replicates with GPT-5.5 and holds only partially with an open-weight Qwen2.5-72B verifier. Ablations show that external evidence is indispensable for factual determination, while internal video evidence grounds the verdict in claim-video consistency. These findings suggest that evidence-efficient verification is achievable, and that explicit abstention is needed when evidence is genuinely inadequate.

Leran Chen, Lingnan Kong, Zile Cai

The University of Sydney

Claim Verification Automated Fact-Checking Evidence Selection Selective Prediction

Oct 7, 2026cs.SE

Has LLM Screening Performance Stalled in Software Engineering Systematic Reviews?

Screening in systematic reviews (SRs) is manual and time-consuming. Prior work has explored large language models (LLMs) for automating this step, but LLMs are evolving rapidly, so earlier performance claims may no longer accurately reflect their screening performance. We used an existing software engineering SR screening benchmark (SESR-Eval) as our data. We also power-sampled a new, smaller dataset (SESR-Eval-Mini) that allows evaluation at lower costs. Using this data, we evaluated eight new LLMs for screening performance. Additionally, we tested different prompts, analyzed LLM agreement in screening decisions and criteria, and examined the effect of refining the inclusion and exclusion criteria on screening performance. The eight new LLMs performed marginally better than the seven old ones: avg. MCC across secondary studies rose from 0.347 to 0.365. Differences between secondary studies are still bigger than between LLMs. Computing the overall screening decision from criterion-level decisions degraded screening performance only slightly. LLMs generally agree with each other in their corresponding screening decisions (mean Gwet's AC1 = 0.830), though certain inclusion and exclusion criteria showed larger disagreement than others. Refining the inclusion and exclusion criteria slightly improved recall and made decisions easier for some LLMs, but overall impacts of criteria refinement were modest. LLMs are not yet ready to replace humans in paper screening and the advantages new, more costly models bring, appear to be very limited. Agent-based approaches, prompt engineering, and further criteria refinement are three potential future research avenues.

Aleksi Huotala, Miikka Kuutila, Mika Mäntylä

University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland. · LUT University, Lahti, Finland.

Evidence Selection LLM Evaluation Software Engineering

Sep 30, 2026cs.AI

BELIEFRAG: Making Adaptive RAG State-Aware under Evolving Evidence

Adaptive RAG uses signals such as confidence, relevance, support, and retrieval quality to decide when to search or correct evidence. In multi-step retrieval, however, these local signals must be combined into a persistent view of what the current evidence supports, what remains missing, and which action should follow. Existing methods often use such signals as separate triggers, making it difficult to preserve a coherent evidence state across a trajectory; we call this problem evidence-state fragmentation. We introduce BELIEFRAG, a closed-loop controller that updates an explicit state over sufficiency, reliability, conflict, uncertainty, evidence gaps, and acquisition cost, then chooses among retrieval, query rewriting, verification, answering, stopping, and abstention. Across six QA benchmarks with gpt-oss-120b, BELIEFRAG reaches mean token F1 0.572 with 3.89k tokens per question, outperforming fixed iterative retrieval (0.555 F1) while using 39% fewer tokens. The same quality-cost pattern transfers to Qwen3-32B, where BELIEFRAG reaches 0.552 F1 versus 0.523 for iterative retrieval while using 35% fewer tokens. Analysis shows that the main gains come from corrective re-retrieval rather than pruning alone, while several belief dimensions are redundant and calibrated answerability plays the strongest operational role. Calibration improves threshold stability across related evidence sources, although source shift can still invalidate the same decision signal.

Hongji Pu

University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign

Adaptive RAG Evidence Selection Agentic RAG Belief Updating in LLMs Evidence Retrieval

Sep 29, 2026cs.CV

When to Retrieve, When to Stay: Uncertainty-Aware Temporal Evidence Allocation for Streaming Video-LLMs

Streaming video understanding requires Video Large Language Models (Video-LLMs) to reason over continuous visual streams under causal constraints. As the visual history grows, a bounded visual?processing budget requires evidence selection that balances temporal recency with query relevance. Recent-only selection excludes potentially relevant historical evidence, whereas Semantic-only retrieval can displace useful recent context when relevance scores are ambiguous. We introduce WRWS (When to Retrieve, When to Stay), a training-free framework for uncertainty-adaptive evidence allocation. A lightweight external vision-language encoder scores query relevance across the observed history, while an adaptive allocation module uses the normalized entropy of the similarity distribution as a proxy for retrieval uncertainty. WRWS favors semantic retrieval when relevance cues are reliable and strengthens the recency prior under uncertainty. Following a retrieve-first, encode-later pipeline, WRWS selects evidence before target-model visual encoding, such that only the selected observations are processed by the costly target Video-LLM. Experiments across four Video-LLM families and multiple model scales demonstrate competitive accuracy on StreamingBench and OVO-Bench. In our efficiency evaluation, WRWS reduces average vision-to-answer time to 47.93% of the state-of-the-art method. Code will be released.

Xiang Hu, Jiazuo Yu, Lu Zhang +2

IIAU Lab, Dalian University of Technology

Streaming Video Understanding Evidence Selection Query-Aware Video Frame Selection VLM Inference

Sep 22, 2026cs.CL

What Changes When Fact-Verification Scores Improve? Evidence and Answer Accounting Across Trained Verifiers and LLMs

A joint fact-verification score assesses answers and submitted evidence together. When the score improves, how much of the gain remains if the answers are held fixed? On FEVEROUS, strict score is the percentage of claims with a correct answer and a complete annotated evidence group in the submitted evidence. Across four trained DeBERTa checkpoints and 7,890 claims, replacing DCUF evidence with UnifEE evidence raises strict score by 9.61 percentage points, compared with 1.96 percentage points in answer accuracy. The paired 95% interval for the strict-score gain is [8.77, 10.43], conditional on these checkpoints. Replacing only the evidence passed to the scorer accounts for 7.92 or 9.08 percentage points when we retain the answers generated from DCUF or UnifEE evidence, respectively. To examine how this evidence gain depends on evaluation choices, we generate 470,400 responses from two 8B LLMs on FEVER, FEVEROUS, and SciFact under two answer formats and two context budgets. Increasing context from 256 to 2,048 tokens raises the fixed-answer evidence gain on FEVEROUS by 3.84 and 3.10 percentage points for Qwen and Llama, respectively. The effects fall short of the prespecified cross-dataset criterion, while some intervals extend beyond the two-point small-effect bound. Post-hoc analyses quantify changes in answers and submitted evidence, and show when aggregate accuracy and evidence-coverage rates miss the claim-level pattern. The four answer-evidence score combinations reveal changes that endpoint and aggregate metrics leave unresolved.

Han Chen, Yingrui Li

LLM Evaluation Evidence Selection Automated Fact-Checking

Sep 16, 2026cs.CL

A Benchmark Framework for Screening Automation in Systematic Reviews

Systematic reviews (SR) are essential for evidence-based research, but their screening phase is highly time-consuming and labor-intensive. Large language models (LLMs) offer a promising opportunity to reduce this workload by assisting with article relevance classification. However, existing evaluation approaches often rely on traditional metrics that may be misleading for highly imbalanced SR screening datasets. This paper presents a benchmark dataset of

45\,064

labeled entries for evaluating LLM performance in SR screening across 32 curated secondary studies. It proposes an evaluation framework that accounts for class imbalance, i.e., the natural prevalence of excluded articles relative to included articles in SRs. It also introduces PromptSR, a tool designed to support prompt experimentation, experiment management, and result analysis for LLM-based screening. We also present a use case demonstrating the application of SRBench and PromptSR.

Gauransh Kumar, Luciano Marchezan, Guillaume Genois +2

Université de Montréal Montreal, Canada

LLM Evaluation Evidence Selection Automated Evaluation

Sep 14, 2026cs.CL

CITECHOICE: A Causal Audit of How Document Presentation Redistributes Citation Credit in Agentic Search

When several retrieved sources support the same claim, an answer engine cites some but not others. We call this decision citation allocation and introduce CITECHOICE, a causal audit of authentic multi-turn agentic search. From 129 everyday-query transcripts, CITECHOICE selects 113 same-call document pairs with independently verified support for the same pre-specified fact, without observing ranks or answer outcomes; blinded human review confirms 103. It runs a hash-verified 2-by-2 replay crossing pair order with jointly generated, fidelity-checked structured and prose renderings of one target while the rest of the transcript remains fixed. Three results emerge. First, and most importantly, structured rendering concentrates citation credit rather than clearly increasing source admission. It raises target citation count by +0.50 citations per answer (95 percent CI [+0.20, +0.84]; Holm-adjusted p=.033), without increasing total citations or reducing competitor credit. The pre-specified incidence effect (whether the target is cited at all) is +4.5 percentage points and inconclusive (95 percent CI [-1.4, +10.4]; p=.168). Second, observational position differences exceed controlled reordering effects: the citation-rate gap between rank 1 and rank 5 is 42.3 percentage points, compared with +7.9 percentage points in the main replay and 0.0 percentage points held out. Third, citation evaluation has a measurable noise floor. Although the aggregate count effect repeats under fresh decoding of 30 frozen families, 15 percent of binary decisions change and decoding accounts for an estimated 45 percent of single-generation family-effect variance. Together, these findings isolate what survives control: presentation can causally redistribute visible citation credit within frozen transcripts. They do not establish reliable source admission, a pure formatting mechanism, or a general rank advantage.

Sriram Selvam, Anneswa Ghosh

Evidence Selection Agentic Retrieval Credit Assignment

Aug 30, 2026cs.AI

PAGE-RAG: Provenance-Aware Graph Evidence Promotion for Fixed-Budget Multi-hop Retrieval-Augmented Generation

Multi-hop question answering in retrieval-augmented gener?ation (RAG) often benefits from retrieving beyond the few candidates that will finally be read: narrow retrieval can miss an indispensable hop, while expanded retrieval introduces topical distractors. This challenge is not tied to a particu?lar knowledge-base format. Candidate pools may come from standalone retrievers, standard RAG backends, or graph-based retrieval pipelines. What is needed is a query-aware selection layer that can use relational structure to filter candidates be?fore generation. PAGE-RAG addresses this setting by using a graph as a temporary selection structure, rather than assum?ing a graph-structured knowledge base. It builds a query-local graph over retrieved candidates, records why candidates are connected, and treats each connection as a support hypothe?sis rather than support itself. We identify the resulting failure mode as a connectivity-support gap: connected candidates do not necessarily support the answer. We propose PAGE-RAG, a Provenance-Aware Graph Evidence promotion method that scores candidate paths with relevance, source-tracing meta?data, specificity, hubness, noise, and coherence signals, and applies minimal sufficient selection to promote supporting facts into a compact reader context. PAGE-RAG can serve as a complete retrieval-to-reading pipeline, and the same promo?tion stage can be inserted after existing retrieval or RAG sys?tems without replacing their upstream retrieval logic. Across three multi-hop QA benchmarks under the same final bud?get, PAGE-RAG improves support F1 and answer F1 by 10.4 and 3.3 points on a weighted average over a strong retriever. As a plug-in, PAGE-RAG further improves all reported RAG backends, including reasoning-oriented, compression-based, graph-based, and document/chunk-level systems.

Haokun Deng, Xunkai Li, Hongchao Qin +1

Department of Computer Science, Beijing Institute of Technology

Multi-Hop QA Retrieval-Augmented Generation Evidence Selection Evidence Retrieval

Aug 7, 2026cs.CL

HNR-DAC: Hard-Negative Reranking and Distribution-Aligned Classification for Scientific Claim Verification

Scientific claim verification over a cited paper requires predicting the claim--paper relation and identifying the paragraphs that justify that prediction. This setting poses two linked challenges: within-paper distractors often resemble genuine evidence, while a classifier trained on gold evidence must operate on retrieved evidence at inference. We present HNR-DAC, a two-stage framework that trains each stage on the cases it will actually encounter. Hard-Negative Reranking (HNR) quantifies evidence confusability using a base reranker's scores on non-gold paragraphs and contrasts gold evidence against the most confusable candidates. Distribution-Aligned Classification (DAC) trains on the Top-1 paragraph produced by the same frozen HNR used to construct inference inputs, while HNR's Top-3 paragraph identifiers provide the evidence output. On the NLPCC 2026 Task 10 Track 2, the final configuration obtains 97.21% Hit@3, 95.79% Macro-F1, 94.47% Joint@3, and an average score of 95.13%. The corresponding submission ranks third on the official Track 2 leaderboard while achieving the highest overall Macro-F1 of 93.05%, alongside 70.16% Joint@3 and an average score of 81.61%.

Zhenchao Wang, Xin Chen, Luoxi Zhang +2

Southern University of Science and Technology, Shenzhen, China · Institute of Artificial Intelligence, Shenzhen University of Advanced Technology, Shenzhen, China · Shenzhen Institutes of Advanced Technology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shenzhen, China

Claim Verification Distribution Shift Hard Negative Mining Evidence Selection Evidence Retrieval Scientific Claim Verification

Jul 31, 2026cs.AI

Evidence-Grounded Constraint Checking in Construction Documents

Professional-document review is a constraint-checking problem in which decisions depend on relations among text, geometry, pages, and document revisions. We present an evidence-grounded pipeline that normalizes extracted facts, executes four-state rules deterministically, retains source spans, and escalates unresolved cases. We evaluate its PDF evidence allocator on 160 reference-based tasks from 29 construction projects using a repeated four-system test and a disjoint two-system breadth extension. In the repeated test, reallocating a four-image budget from retrieved page overviews to one overview and three overlapping tiles improves project-family standardized decision accuracy by 10.6 percentage points (95% project-cluster bootstrap CI: 4.3 to 18.0; exact p = 0.031). This effect does not persist in the broader block: Region-RAG changes accuracy by -4.1 points (95% CI: -10.2 to 1.9; exact p = 0.209), while an equal-image sensitivity favors page breadth. Exact finding-set recovery remains low, false passes remain common, and repeated-run agreement is poorly calibrated. The results identify a resolution-breadth trade-off rather than a universal advantage for region-focused evidence, motivating rule-aware evidence routing and expert review.

Rashid Mushkani, Hugo Berard, Shin Koseki

Cocoon Lab.

Evidence-Grounded Reasoning Evidence Selection Visual Document Retrieval

Jul 23, 2026cs.CL

Evaluation design conditions the expert-vs-auto MeSH gap: a controlled comparison of bag-of-words and BiomedBERT on the Cohen benchmark

A systematic review begins with someone reading thousands of abstracts to identify the few that are relevant, and classifiers are used to prioritise that reading. Their inputs are often augmented with Medical Subject Headings (MeSH), assigned either by expert indexers weeks or months after publication or by automatic tools at once. We did not identify prior work comparing the two directly as classifier features, or asking whether that comparison's outcome depends on how the classifier is evaluated. Using the Cohen et al. (2006) drug-class benchmark, we compare expert assignment against one mechanical procedure, substring matching against a MeSH vocabulary drawn from the benchmark, across a bag-of-words logistic regression classifier (seven reruns) and BiomedBERT (five seeds) on three topics. Under the canonical 5-fold full-corpus design the bag-of-words gap on Statins is +0.096 WSS@95%. Stratified subsampling to matched corpus size (n=803) reduces it by roughly two thirds, to +0.033, with a bootstrap interval that includes zero; 10-fold cross-validation at full corpus size reduces it by roughly four fifths, to +0.021. BiomedBERT under canonical evaluation gives +0.020, a difference of 0.001 from the bag-of-words 10-fold result. An empirical power analysis on a single canonical run per topic indicates that a Statins-sized effect at the per-fold variances of the other two topics would not have been detectable at that design (MDE 0.254 for Opioids, 0.384 for ADHD); at the pooled fold count of the multi-run protocol the bound depends on an effective sample size the design does not determine. The results bound the specific lexical matcher tested rather than automatic MeSH indexing in general. More broadly, benchmark conclusions about feature sources can change substantially under reasonable changes to the evaluation design.

Samuel M. Okoe-Mensah

Accra, Ghana

Benchmark Design Evidence Selection IR Evaluation

Jul 23, 2026cs.LG

Best-of-Evidence: Best-of-N Selection under Partial Verification

BoN improves model outputs by sampling several candidates and selecting one with a proxy score, but it assumes that complete candidates can be evaluated reliably. Many vision-language tasks instead provide only partial verification: a finding, span, value, region, or relation may be checkable even when no dependable whole-response verifier exists. Moreover, the same claim may recur across candidates with opposing stances, allowing one observation to support part of the pool and contradict another. We introduce Best-of-Evidence (BoE), an inference-time selection framework that keeps the BoN candidate pool fixed, represents reusable claims with a signed candidate--factor graph, and allocates a limited budget to evidence actions that can change the final choice. BoE formalizes selection under partial verification and provides a practical score-based controller, with the zero-budget case recovering the underlying BoN decision. Theoretically, we show that residual evidence capacity limits any evidence-driven improvement and that shared factor queries can achieve an O(log K) versus Θ(K) query separation in a factor-code model. Common-ledger experiments on four medical VQA settings show that BoE can improve fixed-pool selection and rescue some BoN failures when evidence is reliable, contrastive, and decision-relevant, while also revealing the channel-quality and candidate-generation limits that prevent universal gains.

Cenwei Zhang, Teng Fang, Yuxia Wang +3

IQuest Research · INSAIT · Technical University of Denmark

Model Selection Evidence-Grounded Reasoning Evidence Selection Best-of-N Sampling

Jul 22, 2026cs.CL

Reinforcement Learning for Large Language Model Selective Evidence Adoption from Contaminated Retrieval Results

Retrieval-augmented large language models frequently face contexts that interleave useful evidence with misleading statements or instruction-like content. Blanket refusal discards valid evidence, whereas uncritical adoption yields incorrect or unsafe answers. The ability to selectively adopt relevant information while rejecting deceptive or harmful content is therefore critical for reliable deployment in real-world retrieval settings. We introduce SelectBench, a controlled benchmark and training set for selective evidence adoption, and post-train Qwen3.5-4B directly with DAPO using either deterministic rule rewards or a frozen semantic judge. On the corrected 325-example SelectBench-v2 test set, strict success rises from 22.46% for the original checkpoint to 25.54% with DAPO-Rule and 26.46% with DAPO-DeepSeek. Both trained policies reduce forbidden-content adoption and produce shorter, more focused responses, yet prompt-injection following does not improve. The paired gains are modest and fail to survive Holm correction, suggesting that stronger reward shaping or additional training iterations may be needed for more robust gains. DAPO-DeepSeek exhibits no material degradation on MMLU or clean HotpotQA, indicating that the post-training procedure preserves general capabilities. These results demonstrate a directional improvement in selective evidence use, while identifying injection resistance and statistical robustness as important remaining challenges for future work.

Yanyu Chen, Yue Li, Yongyi Cui +2

East China Normal University · Shandong University

RL for Language Models Retrieval-Augmented Generation Evidence Selection LLM Reliability RAG Robustness

Jul 21, 2026cs.CL

MIRA-Ev:A Benchmark for Granular Evidence Detection and Relational Reasoning in Clinical Exams

Clinical NLP evaluation remains dominated by multiple-choice question answering (MCQA), which scores only final-answer accuracy and cannot detect when a model reaches the correct diagnosis while grounding it in irrelevant, absent, or contradictory evidence. We introduce MIRA-Ev, a clinical argument mining benchmark built on Spanish Médico Interno Residente (MIR) licensing-exam cases, re-annotated by expert clinicians with span-level premises, claims, and directed support/attack relations, and released in parallel Spanish (native), English, and Basque versions, the first clinical argumentation resource in Basque. MIRA-Ev organizes evaluation into a three-tier task hierarchy: evidence sentence retrieval, argumentative component extraction, and relation classification.

Iker De la Iglesia, Johanna Ramirez-Romero, Jose Maria Villa-Gonzalez +3

HiTZ Center, University of the Basque Country (EHU) · Hospital Universitario de Cruces

Multilingual Language Model Evaluation Argument Mining Evidence Selection Evidence Retrieval

Jul 19, 2026cs.AI

Evidence Interfaces Shape How Retrieval-Augmented Readers Use Support

In multi-hop RAG evaluation, a top-k answer score can hide two different failures: the retrieval window may drop part of the support chain, or it may contain support in a form the adapted reader does not use well. We call this reader-facing form of retrieved evidence an evidence interface. Using three support-annotated multi-hop QA benchmarks, we compare matched adapted readers trained with raw context, retrieval windows, and gold-support diagnostic renderings. These comparisons distinguish support-availability failures from remaining reader-interface effects. Top-k windows become interpretable only after checking whether the complete annotated support chain survives: when it does, short ranked windows can match or improve over raw context; when it does not, missing support explains much of the loss. Gold support-first improves matched readers; on 2Wiki and MuSiQue, a support-supervised ranker raises coverage and recovers raw-context quality at lower prompt cost, while retaining gold headroom. Support-removal checks further show that the gains rely on exposed evidence, not only answer priors. On support-annotated evaluations, top-k answer scores should therefore be reported together with complete-support coverage.

Junchi Liao, Jiawen Deng, Fuji Ren

Multi-Hop QA Learning to Rank Evidence Selection RAG Evaluation Evidence Retrieval

Jul 14, 2026cs.CL

QUBO-Optimized Evidence Selection for Retrieval-Augmented Question Answering with Unconventional Solvers

Retrieval-augmented question answering depends on selecting evidence passages that jointly support answer generation. However, many RAG pipelines rely on top-

k

ranking, where passages are selected mainly by individual relevance scores, even though multi-hop questions often require complementary evidence satisfying multiple information requirements. Recent LLM-based selectors address this by treating retrieval as set selection, but using an LLM for this intermediate stage can be costly and difficult to scale. In this work, we formulate evidence selection as a Quadratic Unconstrained Binary Optimization (QUBO) problem. Given a question, candidate passages, and decomposed information requirements, our method constructs an energy function that balances relevance, requirement coverage, support strength, redundancy, complementarity, and compactness. Low-energy solutions correspond to compact evidence subsets that cover the needed requirements while avoiding unnecessary or repetitive context. The selected passages are then passed to a downstream language model for answer generation, separating combinatorial evidence selection from semantic answer generation. We evaluate the proposed QUBO selector on HotpotQA and compare it with LLM-based set selectors and non-LLM baselines including BM25, relevance top-

k

, maximal marginal relevance, hybrid lexical--semantic ranking, greedy coverage, and random selection. The QUBO selector achieves competitive exact-match and token-F1 performance relative to LLM-based selectors while providing a solver-compatible formulation for structured evidence selection. These results suggest that multi-hop evidence selection can be cast as discrete optimization, opening a path toward RAG pipelines where LLMs are reserved for semantic processing and answer generation, while context selection is handled by Ising/QUBO-compatible solvers.

Rahul Singh, Madhav Vadlamani

University of California Santa Barbara · Georgia Institute of Technology

Multi-Hop QA Retrieval-Augmented Generation Evidence Selection

Jul 12, 2026cs.AI

STEC: Evidence Compression for Deep Search in Open-domain Multi-Hop QA

In open-domain multi-hop question answering (QA), LLM-based search agents offer a promising approach to knowledge-intensive QA by combining retrieval with reasoning. Existing methods mainly improve open-domain multi-hop QA through reasoning paradigms, retrieval interaction, and search strategy optimization. However, using multiple search trajectories introduces a challenging final answer selection problem. Different trajectories may support different candidates, and the retrieved information can be heterogeneous, redundant, incomplete, or conflicting. Directly comparing raw trajectories exposes the verifier to noisy and unaligned content, while comparing answer strings ignores the evidence supporting each candidate, making reliable final selection difficult. To address this challenge, we propose STEC, an evidence compression framework for final answer selection in multi-hop QA. STEC selects the final answer from the existing candidate set through two mechanisms: (1) Answer-Level Evidence Compression, which groups trajectories by normalized answer identity and converts each answer group into a candidate-specific evidence representation; and (2) Evidence-Guided Answer Verification, which compares these representations and selects the final answer from the candidate set. The design shifts final selection from raw trajectory comparison to candidate-level evidence comparison. We evaluate STEC on four open-domain multi-hop QA benchmarks against representative baselines. Experimental results show that STEC performs best overall among the compared methods, and ablation results provide evidence that answer-level evidence compression contributes to final answer selection.

Xinkang Li, Rong Jiang, Xin Song +3

National University of Defense Technology, China · Harbin Institute of Technology, Shenzhen, China

Multi-Hop QA LLM Answer Verification Evidence Selection

Jul 2, 2026cs.AI

Evidence-State Rewards for Long-Context Reasoning

Long-context reasoning requires models to locate, revise, and synthesize evidence distributed across lengthy inputs. Existing long-context RL methods usually reward final answers or static evidence extraction, offering little feedback on how intermediate actions change the model's evidence state. We propose Maven, a reinforcement learning framework with an editable evidence memory. Maven defines an answer-conditioned evidence-state value and rewards action-level state transitions: add actions are credited by marginal gain and hindsight contribution, link actions by evidence synergy, and drop actions by improved answer support after removing misleading evidence. These rewards are assigned to the corresponding action spans in GRPO. Across Llama and Qwen models on LongBench v2, LongReason, and RULER, Maven outperforms outcome-only RL and evidence-identification baselines, producing more sufficient evidence sets and lower distractor retention. Our results show that long-context RL benefits from optimizing stateful evidence navigation rather than one-shot evidence extraction.

Ya Gao, Pekka Marttinen

1Aalto University

Process Reward Models RL for Language Model Reasoning Evidence Selection Long-Context Inference

Jul 1, 2026cs.CL

The Course of News Events: A Comparison of Bottom-Up and Top-Down Approaches for Collecting Text-Based Data about Disasters

News articles are an important source of information on disaster impacts and adaptation. A key methodological challenge in socio-environmental studies is how to select a representative data sample. Two approaches are common: querying news databases top-down with the aid of an existing disaster inventory or using NLP methods to cluster news texts bottom-up based on temporal and spatial features. Using a dataset of German news about landslides worldwide, we compare these approaches and discuss variations in event coverage. Such research design decision can influence the resulting news sample, affecting its use in studies of inequality in media coverage, disaster monitoring and inventory enrichment.

Brielen Madureira, Andreas Niekler, Mariana Madruga de Brito

LeipzigLab – Climate Discourse, Leipzig University, Germany · Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research, Germany · Computational Humanities, Leipzig University, Germany

Evidence Selection Computational Social Science

Jun 24, 2026cs.CL

Charting the Growth of Social-Physical HRI (spHRI): A Systematic Review Pipeline Augmented by Small Language Models

Social-physical human-robot interaction (spHRI) has grown rapidly across robotics, human-computer interaction, human-robot interaction, and haptics. Yet, fragmented terminology and inconsistent methodologies make systematic synthesis difficult. To support scalable review practices, we evaluated the extent to which small language models (SLMs; < 1.5B parameters) can assist with title and abstract screening for a large spHRI systematic review. While no SLMs matched human reviewers' performance, the models operated locally and screened papers orders of magnitude faster. The combined SLM ensemble identified 39 papers reviewers missed, representing 10.29% of the final relevant dataset. These results demonstrate that SLMs can augment, rather than replace, expert reviewers and make large-scale literature reviews accessible and sustainable.

Mayumi Mohan, Ju-Hung Chen, Alexis E. Block

Case Western Reserve University Cleveland, USA

Evidence Selection Small Language Models Language Model Ensembles Human-Robot Interaction

Jun 16, 2026cs.SE

Understanding LLMs in Title-Abstract Screening: From Disagreements to Recommendations

Several studies have examined the use of large language models (LLMs) for title-abstract screening in systematic reviews (SRs), reporting mixed accuracy. However, questions of reliability remain largely unaddressed. In this study, we go beyond quantitative LLM-human agreement metrics and qualitatively investigate how and why LLMs fail. We also propose actionable recommendations. We analyzed disagreements between LLMs and researchers across six software engineering SRs and over 1,000 primary study papers. For each SR, papers were screened independently by human experts and LLMs in zero-shot mode, resulting in Kappa values ranging from 0.52 to 0.77. Qualitative analysis suggests that human-LLM disagreement results from recurring, identifiable causes, such as boundary ambiguity in key terms, keyword overemphasization, and incorrect topic inference. Based on these findings, we propose recommendations such as validating semantic understanding before deployment, running multiple LLMs, and focusing validation efforts on borderline cases. Future studies are needed to validate the impact of our recommendations, and community efforts are needed to develop normative guidelines on LLM usage in SRs.

Mika Mäntylä, Patricia Matsubara, Katia Romero Felizardo +5

University of Helsinki, Finland · UFMS, Brazil · UTFPR – Federal University of Technology - Paraná, Brazil +3

LLM Evaluation Evidence Selection LLM Reliability

Jun 1, 2026cs.CL

When Knowledge Is Not Free: Cost-Aware Evidence Selection in Retrieval-Augmented Generation

Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) typically assumes that external knowledge is free, but many high-quality sources are paywalled, licensed, restricted, or otherwise costly to access. We introduce cost-aware RAG, a setting where retrieved evidence is assigned access-cost tiers and systems must answer under an explicit evidence-access budget. We instantiate this setting by augmenting MS MARCO v2.1 with access-friction tiers and evaluate budgeted evidence selection across general-domain and domain-specific QA benchmarks. Our results show that static selection is brittle: no fixed selector uniformly dominates, and larger budgets do not reliably improve answer quality, even when costly evidence is domain-matched. We then study agentic cost-aware RAG, where an LLM decides when to retrieve, which tier to access, and when to stop. Agents show strong promise as adaptive evidence-acquisition controllers, but their behavior remains highly model- and task-dependent. These findings suggest that cost-aware evidence acquisition is a central challenge for the next generation of RAG systems. All code and data are available at https://github.com/Mignonmy/Cost-Aware.

Mingyan Wu, Han Yang, Omer Ben-Porat +1

Northeastern University · Technical University of Munich · GESIS – Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences +3

Retrieval-Augmented Generation Evidence Selection Agentic RAG

May 31, 2026cs.CL

Beyond Topical Similarity: Contrastive Evidence Retrieval with Interpretable Attention Alignment in RAG

Ensuring factuality and interpretability in RAG remains an open and urgent problem. We introduce Contrastive Evidence Rationale Attention (CERA), the first retrieval framework to employ subjectivity-based hard negative selection and inject an evidential inductive bias into contrastive learning through an auxiliary attention alignment loss. CERA fine-tunes a dense retriever using two training objectives: triplet-based contrastive learning and interpretable attention alignment, which supervises CLS-to-token attention using a part-of-speech-weighted masking distribution over human-annotated factual rationales as evidence signals. Experiments on a large corpus of clinical trial reports demonstrate that the subjectivity-based hard negative selection substantially improves retrieval effectiveness compared to both Contriever and hard negative selection baselines. Furthermore, rationale alignment improves faithfulness while maintaining competitive retrieval performance, supporting the hypothesis that attention can serve as a more faithful explanation of model behavior when guided by human rationales. Moving beyond topical similarity, CERA enables the retriever to identify the specific tokens that constitute supporting evidence, promoting more interpretable evidence selection in RAG systems.

Francielle Vargas, João Robiatti, Diego Alves +6

University of Chile · São Paulo State University · Saarland University +4

Retrieval-Augmented Generation Evidence Selection Evidence Retrieval Dense Retrieval

May 25, 2026cs.CL

AuthTrace: Diagnosing Evidence Construction in Thematically Dense Single-Author Corpora

Evidence construction--the stage that determines which passages reach the language model before generation begins--is evaluated paradigm by paradigm, leaving practitioners with no principled way to diagnose which organization strategy fails, where, or why. We introduce AuthTrace, a diagnostic benchmark built on thematically dense single-author corpora where near-miss distractors share style, topic, and vocabulary with the required evidence. AuthTrace provides explicit quoted evidence, exact fan-in annotation, and a unified pack-level protocol measuring evidence recall, evidence precision, and answer correctness. A fan-in gradient--the number of source documents required to support the answer--serves as the primary diagnostic axis, enabling controlled comparison across retrieval, memory, graph, and structured-evidence paradigms. Evaluating eight systems across two QA models, we find that evidence recall is the strongest observed predictor of answer correctness under the primary reader-judge pair (r = 0.96); most failures stem from missing evidence rather than answer synthesis. Fan-in further exposes paradigm-specific collapse patterns: flat retrieval degrades 2-3x faster than thematically organized evidence construction. These results show fan-in decomposition to be a reusable diagnostic lens for identifying where evidence-construction systems fail and which paradigm best serves a given workload.

Xiaoqing Wu, Feifei Li, Haoliang Ming +1

WeChat, Tencent Inc., Beijing, China

Evidence Selection RAG Evaluation Evidence Retrieval Knowledge-Intensive QA

May 21, 2026cs.AI

ECPO: Evidence-Coupled Policy Optimization for Evidence-Certified Candidate Ranking

Ranking systems used in decision-support settings should not only order candidates but also expose evidence that can be independently checked. We study evidence-certified candidate ranking: given an intent_id, a predefined plan skeleton, a window-local candidate roster, and text-derived candidate trajectories with span provenance, a system must output a Top-K list together with doc_id:span evidence certificates whose cited spans are sufficient to recover the decision. We instantiate this task on MAVEN-ERE and RAMS with fixed upstream extraction, window-local randomized candidate identifiers, skeleton-aligned trajectory supervision, hard negatives, and audit references. We introduce Evidence-Coupled Policy Optimization (ECPO), a listwise policy-optimization objective whose action is the joint object of ranking and evidence certificate. ECPO first learns an interpretable trajectory reward from skeleton alignment, argument consistency, and optional graph features; it then optimizes a constrained policy with three coupled rewards: listwise ranking utility, span-level certificate validity, and an evidence-cycle reward computed by a label-free deterministic verifier that reconstructs candidate support from claim-stripped cited spans. This reframes the goal from maximizing ordinary NDCG alone to maximizing CertNDCG and decision-evidence coupling. The evaluation compares ECPO against zero-shot, SFT, and GRPO policies, RM-only scoring with deterministic evidence attachment, grammar/JSON-constrained decoding, validator retry, best-of-N RM selection, and post-hoc evidence rationalization under closed-roster, predicted-roster, and hybrid-roster settings.

Miaobo Hu, Shuhao Hu, BoKun Wang +5

Institute of Information Engineering, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China · School of Cyber Security, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China · School of Artificial Intelligence, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China

Data Provenance Learning to Rank Evidence Selection Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards

May 21, 2026cs.CL

Claim-Selective Certification for High-Risk Medical Retrieval-Augmented Generation

Medical RAG systems in high-risk QA settings are often evaluated through a single answer-or-abstain decision, but mixed evidence may support one claim, require conditions for another, and contradict a third. We study claim-selective certification: each response is decomposed into verifiable claims, scored against retrieved evidence, and mapped by an intent-aware selector to {full, partial, conflict, abstain}. On the primary weak-label certificate protocol, whose real-source-only dev/test rows cover the naturally occurring non-abstain actions, the full system records UCCR=0.0000, PAU=1.0000, PAU Precision=0.9901, and action accuracy=0.9204 on dev (n=314), and UCCR=0.0000, PAU=0.9967, PAU Precision=0.9739, and action accuracy=0.8997 on test (n=319). UCCR measures unsupported-claim risk within the certificate definition, and a source-missing counterfactual slice evaluates abstain under empty evidence. Shortcut controls quantify the action-label prior explained by source and intent metadata, while source/evidence-novel slices characterize transfer boundaries. The resulting interface separates action-label prediction from evidence-linked claim selection under mixed evidence.

Shao Kan

Jinglue Technology Development (Nanjing) Co., Ltd.

Claim Verification Healthcare Evidence Selection Clinical QA RAG Evaluation LLM Abstention

May 19, 2026cs.LG

Learning to Select Source-Traceable Evidence for Language-Model Prediction from Irregular Clinical Time Series

Numerical time-series models effectively process irregular electronic health record (EHR) trajectories, but do not expose which temporal patterns support each prediction as readable evidence. Existing text-based interfaces either serialize observations, preserving source traceability but offering limited clinical interpretation, or generate patient-level summaries that improve readability but can obscure links to source measurements. We introduce STEP-CTS (Source-Traceable Evidence for Prediction from Clinical Time-Series), which learns to select source-traceable text evidence for a language-model predictor. Multi-scale window statistics of each trajectory are verbalized as sets of deterministic threshold predicates, each set linked to its source window (e.g., "[5-7 h]: last temperature at least 38C"). An offline LLM, run once per unique predicate set without access to patient records, the prediction task, or outcome labels, attaches clinical concepts such as "fever" to their supporting predicates and abstains when none applies. Each predicate set, together with its concepts, forms an evidence unit. A learned Evidence Selector selects a fixed-size subset of the evidence units, which a pretrained clinical language-model encoder reads to make the prediction, with no patient-level text generation. Across three ICU benchmarks, STEP-CTS outperforms evaluated text-based baselines, improving AUPRC over the strongest by 5.1, 3.7, and 11.7 percentage points on P2012, MIMIC-III, and P2019, respectively, and is competitive with dedicated numerical time-series models. Ablations show that clinical concepts and learned evidence selection each contribute to predictive performance. In a blinded clinician study, the selected evidence is rated as traceable as deterministic serialization, near the ceiling of the scale, and above generated summaries on clinical interpretation.

Kwanhyung Lee, Juhwan Choi, Jongheon Kim +5

Kim Jaechul Graduate School of AI, KAIST · AITRICS

Irregular Time-Series Modeling Healthcare Evidence Selection Clinical Outcome Prediction Longitudinal EHR Modeling

May 13, 2026cs.CL

Utility-Oriented Visual Evidence Selection for Multimodal Retrieval-Augmented Generation

Visual evidence selection is a critical component of multimodal retrieval-augmented generation (RAG), yet existing methods typically rely on semantic relevance or surface-level similarity, which are often misaligned with the actual utility of visual evidence for downstream reasoning. We reformulate multimodal evidence selection from an information-theoretic perspective by defining evidence utility as the information gain induced on a model's output distribution. To overcome the intractability of answer-space optimization, we introduce a latent notion of evidence helpfulness and theoretically show that, under mild assumptions, ranking evidence by information gain on this latent variable is equivalent to answer-space utility. We further propose a training-free, surrogate-accelerated framework that efficiently estimates evidence utility using lightweight multimodal models. Experiments on MRAG-Bench and Visual-RAG across multiple model families demonstrate that our method consistently outperforms state-of-the-art RAG baselines while achieving substantial reductions in computational cost.

Weiqing Luo, Zongye Hu, Xiao Wang +3

♦Arizona State University · ♥Texas A&M University · ♠Morgan Stanley

Multimodal RAG Evidence Selection

May 4, 2026cs.CL

AdaGATE: Adaptive Gap-Aware Token-Efficient Evidence Assembly for Multi-Hop Retrieval-Augmented Generation

Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) remains brittle on multi-hop questions in realistic deployment settings, where retrieved evidence may be noisy or redundant and only limited context can be passed to the generator. Existing controllers address parts of this problem, but typically either expand context additively, select from a fixed top-k set, or optimize relevance without explicitly repairing missing bridge facts. We propose AdaGATE, a training-free evidence controller for multi-hop RAG that frames evidence selection as a token-constrained repair problem. AdaGATE combines entity centric gap tracking, targeted micro-query generation, and a utility based selection mechanism that balances gap coverage, corroboration, novelty, redundancy, and direct question relevance. We evaluate AdaGATE on HotpotQA under clean, redundancy, and noise injected retrieval conditions. Across all three settings, AdaGATE achieves the best evidence F1 among the compared controllers, reaching 62.3% on clean data and 71.2% under redundancy injection, while using 2.6x fewer input tokens than Adaptive-k. These results suggest that explicit gap-aware repair, combined with token-efficient evidence selection, improves robustness in multi-hop RAG under imperfect retrieval. Our code and evaluation pipeline are available at https://github.com/eliguo/AdaGATE.

Yilin Guo, Yinshan Wang, Yixuan Wang

Center for Data Science New York University · Tandon School of Engineering New York University

Multi-Hop QA Retrieval-Augmented Generation Adaptive RAG Evidence Selection Retrieval Robustness RAG Robustness

Apr 29, 2026cs.SE

Beyond Accuracy: LLM Variability in Evidence Screening for Software Engineering SLRs

Context: Study screening in systematic literature reviews is costly, inconsistency-prone, and risk-asymmetric, since false negatives can compromise validity. Despite rapid uptake of Large Language Models (LLMs), there is limited evidence on how such models behave during the study screening phase, particularly regarding the choice of specific LLMs and their comparison with classical models. Objective: To assess LLM performance and variability in screening, quantify the impact of input metadata (abstract, title, keywords), and compare LLMs with classical classifiers under a shared protocol. Methods: We analyzed 12 LLMs from 4 providers (OpenAI, Google Gemini, Anthropic, Llama) and 4 classical models (Logistic Regression, Support Vector Classification, Random Forest, and Naive Bayes) on 2 real Systematic Literature Reviews (SLRs), totaling 518 papers. The experimental design investigated 3 critical dimensions: (i) LLMs performance variability, (ii) the impact of input feature composition (abstract, title, and keywords) on LLM performance, and (iii) the real gain of using LLMs instead of more traditional classification models. Results: LLMs exhibited substantial heterogeneity and residual non-determinism even at temperature zero. Abstract availability was decisive: removing it consistently degraded performance, while adding title and/or keywords to the abstract yielded no robust gains. Compared to classical models, performance differences were not consistent enough to support generalizable LLM superiority. Discussion: LLM adoption should be justified by operational and governance constraints (reproducibility, cost, metadata availability), supported by pilot validation and explicit reporting of variability and input configuration.

Gilberto Sussumu Hida, Danilo Monteiro Ribeiro, Erika Yahata

AIBL · CESAR School · CMCC +1

Software Engineering LLM Evaluation Evidence Selection Text Classification