A Four-Condition Diagnostic Protocol for Evidence Utilization in Long-Context and Retrieval-Augmented Language Models
Mirrored from arXiv — NLP / Computation & Language for archival readability. Support the source by reading on the original site.
Computer Science > Computation and Language
Title:A Four-Condition Diagnostic Protocol for Evidence Utilization in Long-Context and Retrieval-Augmented Language Models
Abstract:Final-answer accuracy, retrieval recall, and citation overlap do not by themselves identify whether a long-context or retrieval-augmented language model used the evidence it was given. A model can answer from parametric memory, fail despite receiving the right passages, or cite evidence without converting it into the requested answer. This paper proposes a matched four-condition evidence-availability protocol--no evidence, full context, retrieved evidence, and oracle-evidence reference--for diagnosing evidence utilization under fixed examples, prompts, score fields, retrieval settings, and validity checks. ONCU is used as a protocol-bound estimator of recovered oracle-reference evidence advantage and is computed only for denominator-valid groups; denominator-free answer, evidence, retrieval, and failure-audit metrics are reported separately. The empirical study evaluates five local open-weight models from the Qwen, Gemma, Llama, and Mistral families across Controlled-ONCU-safe16K, HotpotQA-ONCU, and 2WikiMultiHopQA-ONCU, with 18,000 ONCU-compatible predictions. The main finding is a task-dependent bottleneck split: controlled synthetic settings primarily expose full-context utilization failures, whereas the tested realistic multi-hop settings primarily expose retrieval-chain coverage failures in denominator-free answer and evidence metrics, with ONCU supporting the same direction on oracle-improving groups. The contribution is a diagnostic protocol for separating no-evidence answerability, oracle-evidence recoverability, full-context utilization, and retrieval-conditioned utilization, rather than a single-score leaderboard for long-context or retrieval-augmented systems.
| Comments: | 52 pages, 34 tables, 1 figure |
| Subjects: | Computation and Language (cs.CL) |
| Cite as: | arXiv:2606.06758 [cs.CL] |
| (or arXiv:2606.06758v1 [cs.CL] for this version) | |
| https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2606.06758
arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
|
Access Paper:
- View PDF
- HTML (experimental)
- TeX Source
References & Citations
Bibliographic and Citation Tools
Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article
Demos
Recommenders and Search Tools
arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
More from arXiv — NLP / Computation & Language
-
RECAP: Regression Evaluation for Continual Adaptation of Prompts
Jun 8
-
RASFT: Rollout-Adaptive Supervised Fine-Tuning for Reasoning
Jun 8
-
OffQ: Taming Structured Outliers in LLM Quantization by Offsetting
Jun 8
-
DEFINED: A Data-Efficient Computational Framework for Fine-Grained Creativity Assessment in Debate Scenarios
Jun 8
Discussion (0)
Sign in to join the discussion. Free account, 30 seconds — email code or GitHub.
Sign in →No comments yet. Sign in and be the first to say something.