pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.28737 · v1 · pith:WKPHECBUnew · submitted 2026-06-27 · 💻 cs.CL · cs.AI

5ting at SemEval-2026 Task 8: Strong End-to-End Multi-Turn RAG via LLM-Based Reranking and Faithfulness Control

Thien-Qua-T-Nguyen , Chi Hoang , Nguyen Tran , Tri Le , Khanh Truong , Chinh Trong Nguyen This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-30 10:03 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.CL cs.AI
keywords multi-turn RAGretrieval augmented generationLLM rerankingfaithfulness controldense retrievalFAISS indexingSemEval task
0
0 comments X

The pith

A multi-turn RAG system pairs dense retrieval and query merging with LLM reranking and evidence-constrained generation to reach competitive task scores.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper describes the 5ting system built for SemEval-2026 Task 8 on multi-turn retrieval augmented generation. It integrates BGE-M3 retrieval over FAISS indexes, dual-query merging, LLM reranking, and role-separated answer generation that stays inside the retrieved passages. The retriever records nDCG@5 of 0.4719 on Task A while the full pipeline records a harmonic score of 0.5597 and RL_F of 0.7692 on Task C. Readers would care because multi-turn RAG routinely suffers from context drift and unsupported claims, and the described controls aim to limit those failures.

Core claim

The 5ting system combines BGE-M3 dense retrieval with FAISS indexing, dual-query merged retrieval, and LLM-based reranking, followed by role-separated generation constrained to retrieved evidence. The retriever achieved nDCG@5 = 0.4719 in Task A, while the end-to-end system ranked in Task C with a harmonic score of 0.5597 and RL_F = 0.7692.

What carries the argument

LLM-based reranking followed by role-separated generation constrained to retrieved evidence, which limits output to passages supplied by the retriever.

If this is right

  • Dual-query merging improves coverage of evolving user intents across conversation turns.
  • Evidence-constrained generation lowers the rate of unsupported statements in multi-turn answers.
  • Role separation between retrieval and generation steps maintains consistency when context drifts.
  • The measured nDCG@5 and RL_F values indicate the pipeline meets the task criteria for relevance and faithfulness.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the reranker is the main contributor, swapping it into other retrieval pipelines could raise their scores without retraining the entire stack.
  • Testing the same pipeline on conversations longer than those in the SemEval data would show whether dual-query merging scales or saturates.
  • Measuring how often the constrained generator still cites passages that the reranker down-ranked would quantify any hidden selection bias.

Load-bearing premise

The assumption that LLM-based reranking and evidence-constrained generation will reliably improve faithfulness without introducing new biases or errors from the reranker itself.

What would settle it

A side-by-side run in which removing the LLM reranker raises the faithfulness score or in which the constrained generator still produces claims absent from the retrieved evidence.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.28737 by Chi Hoang, Chinh Trong Nguyen, Khanh Truong, Nguyen Tran, Thien-Qua-T-Nguyen, Tri Le.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Overview of the proposed multi-turn RAG pipeline. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We introduce 5ting, our system for the SemEval2026 Task 8 (MTRAGEval), which evaluates multi-turn Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG) systems. Multi turn RAG involves context drift, under specification, and hallucination risk. Our system combines BGE-M3 dense retrieval with FAISS indexing, dual-query merged retrieval, and LLM based reranking, followed by role separated generation constrained to retrieved evidence. The retriever achieved nDCG@5 = 0.4719 in Task A, while the end to end system ranked in Task C with a harmonic score of 0.5597 and RL_F = 0.7692.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 0 minor

Summary. The paper describes the 5ting system submitted to SemEval-2026 Task 8 (MTRAGEval) for evaluating multi-turn Retrieval Augmented Generation. The pipeline combines BGE-M3 dense retrieval with FAISS indexing, dual-query merged retrieval, LLM-based reranking, and role-separated generation constrained to retrieved evidence. It reports a retriever nDCG@5 of 0.4719 on Task A and an end-to-end harmonic score of 0.5597 with RL_F of 0.7692 on Task C.

Significance. If the scores are reproducible and the components contribute as claimed, the work provides a competitive baseline for multi-turn RAG systems that attempt to mitigate context drift and hallucination via reranking and evidence constraints. As a shared-task system description, its value lies in the concrete ranking achieved rather than in novel theoretical contributions; however, the absence of component-level analysis limits insight into which elements drive the reported faithfulness control.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract / Results] Abstract and results section: the central claim that LLM-based reranking and evidence-constrained generation produce 'strong' end-to-end performance with faithfulness control rests on aggregate Task C scores (harmonic 0.5597, RL_F 0.7692) without any ablation (with vs. without reranker; with vs. without evidence constraint) or direct faithfulness metric (e.g., hallucination rate or citation accuracy). This makes it impossible to verify that the highlighted components are net positive rather than neutral.
  2. [Abstract] Abstract: no baselines, implementation details, or error analysis are supplied for the reported nDCG@5 = 0.4719 or the Task C metrics, so the robustness and statistical significance of the ranking cannot be assessed from the manuscript.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 1 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive feedback on our shared-task system description. We respond point-by-point to the major comments below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract / Results] Abstract and results section: the central claim that LLM-based reranking and evidence-constrained generation produce 'strong' end-to-end performance with faithfulness control rests on aggregate Task C scores (harmonic 0.5597, RL_F 0.7692) without any ablation (with vs. without reranker; with vs. without evidence constraint) or direct faithfulness metric (e.g., hallucination rate or citation accuracy). This makes it impossible to verify that the highlighted components are net positive rather than neutral.

    Authors: We agree the manuscript provides only aggregate end-to-end scores without ablations or supplementary faithfulness metrics such as hallucination rate. As a SemEval system paper prepared under shared-task deadlines, our priority was delivering a working pipeline rather than component-wise experiments. The task-defined RL_F of 0.7692 serves as the primary faithfulness signal. We will revise the abstract to describe the results as 'competitive' rather than 'strong' and add a limitations paragraph explicitly noting the lack of ablations. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: no baselines, implementation details, or error analysis are supplied for the reported nDCG@5 = 0.4719 or the Task C metrics, so the robustness and statistical significance of the ranking cannot be assessed from the manuscript.

    Authors: The abstract is length-constrained; the body of the paper details the BGE-M3 + FAISS pipeline, dual-query merging, LLM reranking, and role-separated generation. No official task baselines were released for direct comparison, and we did not conduct statistical significance tests or error analysis. We will expand the methods and results sections with additional implementation specifics and a brief note on the absence of significance testing. revision: partial

standing simulated objections not resolved
  • We cannot supply ablation results or additional direct faithfulness metrics because these experiments were not performed during the shared-task timeline.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: purely empirical shared-task results with no derivations or self-referential claims

full rationale

The paper describes a RAG pipeline for SemEval-2026 Task 8 and reports aggregate empirical metrics (nDCG@5, harmonic score, RL_F) on an external benchmark. No equations, fitted parameters renamed as predictions, self-citation chains, or uniqueness theorems appear in the provided text. All performance numbers are direct outputs of running the described system on the task data; nothing reduces to its own inputs by construction. This is the expected non-finding for a competition system paper.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

No mathematical model, free parameters, or invented entities; the contribution is an empirical system description for a competition task.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5675 in / 1155 out tokens · 38925 ms · 2026-06-30T10:03:55.065173+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

29 extracted references · 12 canonical work pages · 3 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics , volume =

    Evaluating Correctness and Faithfulness of Instruction-Following Models for Question Answering , author =. Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics , volume =. 2024 , url =. 2307.16877 , archivePrefix =

    work page arXiv 2024

  2. [3]

    2020 , organization =

    Dalton, Jeffrey and Xiong, Chenyan and Callan, Jamie , booktitle =. 2020 , organization =

    2020

  3. [4]

    2024 , eprint =

    Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Large Language Models: A Survey , author =. 2024 , eprint =

    2024

  4. [5]

    Billion-Scale Similarity Search with

    Johnson, Jeff and Douze, Matthijs and J. Billion-Scale Similarity Search with. IEEE Transactions on Big Data , volume =. 2019 , publisher =

    2019

  5. [6]

    Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP) , pages =

    Dense Passage Retrieval for Open-Domain Question Answering , author =. Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP) , pages =. 2020 , organization =

    2020

  6. [7]

    2501.03468 , archivePrefix =

    Katsis, Yannis and Rosenthal, Sara and Fadnis, Kshitij and Gunasekara, Chulaka and Lee, Young-Suk and Popa, Lucian and Shah, Vraj and Zhu, Huaiyu and Contractor, Danish and Danilevsky, Marina , year =. 2501.03468 , archivePrefix =

    work page arXiv

  7. [8]

    Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Knowledge-Intensive

    Lewis, Patrick and Perez, Ethan and Piktus, Aleksandra and Petroni, Fabio and Karpukhin, Vladimir and Goyal, Naman and K. Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Knowledge-Intensive. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS) , volume =

  8. [9]

    2023 , eprint =

    Zero-Shot Listwise Document Reranking with a Large Language Model , author =. 2023 , eprint =

    2023

  9. [10]

    Proceedings of the 46th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval , pages =

    Exploiting Simulated User Feedback for Conversational Search: Ranking, Rewriting, and Beyond , author =. Proceedings of the 46th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval , pages =. 2023 , organization =

    2023

  10. [12]

    2026 , organization =

    Rosenthal, Sara and Shah, Vraj and Katsis, Yannis and Danilevsky, Marina , booktitle =. 2026 , organization =

    2026

  11. [13]

    Sun, Weiwei and Yan, Lingyong and Ma, Xinyu and Wang, Shuaiqiang and Ren, Pengjie and Chen, Zhumin and Yin, Dawei and Ren, Zhaochun , booktitle =. Is. 2023 , organization =

    2023

  12. [14]

    Proceedings of the 14th ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining (WSDM) , pages =

    Question Rewriting for Conversational Question Answering , author =. Proceedings of the 14th ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining (WSDM) , pages =. 2021 , organization =

    2021

  13. [15]

    and Zhang, Hao and Gonzalez, Joseph E

    Zheng, Lianmin and Chiang, Wei-Lin and Sheng, Ying and Zhuang, Siyuan and Wu, Zhanghao and Zhuang, Yonghao and Lin, Zi and Li, Zhuohan and Li, Dacheng and Xing, Eric P. and Zhang, Hao and Gonzalez, Joseph E. and Stoica, Ion , booktitle =. Judging. 2023 , url =

    2023

  14. [17]

    2024 , eprint =

    Liu, Zihan and Ping, Wei and Roy, Rajarshi and Xu, Peng and Lee, Chankyu and Shoeybi, Mohammad and Catanzaro, Bryan , booktitle =. 2024 , eprint =

    2024

  15. [20]

    2023 , eprint=

    RankZephyr: Effective and Robust Zero-Shot Listwise Reranking is a Breeze! , author=. 2023 , eprint=

    2023

  16. [21]

    Jianlv Chen, Shitao Xiao, Peitian Zhang, Kun Luo, Defu Lian, and Zheng Liu. 2024. https://arxiv.org/abs/2402.03216 BGE M3 -embedding: Multi-linguality, multi-functionality, multi-granularity text embeddings through self-knowledge distillation . In Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL 2024

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  17. [22]

    Yunfan Gao, Yun Xiong, Xinyu Gao, Kangxiang Jia, Jinliu Pan, Yuxi Bi, Yi Dai, Jiawei Sun, Meng Wang, and Haofen Wang. 2024. https://arxiv.org/abs/2312.10997 Retrieval-augmented generation for large language models: A survey . Preprint, arXiv:2312.10997

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  18. [23]

    Jeff Johnson, Matthijs Douze, and Herv \'e J \'e gou. 2019. Billion-scale similarity search with GPU s. IEEE Transactions on Big Data, 7(3):535--547

    2019

  19. [24]

    Yannis Katsis, Sara Rosenthal, Kshitij Fadnis, Chulaka Gunasekara, Young-Suk Lee, Lucian Popa, Vraj Shah, Huaiyu Zhu, Danish Contractor, and Marina Danilevsky. 2025. https://doi.org/10.1162/TACL.a.19 mtrag: A multi-turn conversational benchmark for evaluating retrieval-augmented generation systems . Transactions of the Association for Computational Lingui...

    work page doi:10.1162/tacl.a.19 2025

  20. [25]

    Zihan Liu, Wei Ping, Rajarshi Roy, Peng Xu, Chankyu Lee, Mohammad Shoeybi, and Bryan Catanzaro. 2024. https://arxiv.org/abs/2401.10225 ChatQA : Surpassing GPT -4 on conversational QA and RAG . In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS), volume 37

    work page arXiv 2024

  21. [26]

    Xueguang Ma, Xinyu Zhang, Ronak Pradeep, and Jimmy Lin. 2023. https://arxiv.org/abs/2305.02156 Zero-shot listwise document reranking with a large language model . Preprint, arXiv:2305.02156

    work page arXiv 2023

  22. [27]

    Paul Owoicho, Ivan Sekuli \'c , Mohammad Aliannejadi, Jeffrey Dalton, and Fabio Crestani. 2023. Exploiting simulated user feedback for conversational search: Ranking, rewriting, and beyond. In Proceedings of the 46th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, pages 632--642. ACM

    2023

  23. [28]

    Ronak Pradeep, Sahel Sharifymoghaddam, and Jimmy Lin. 2023. https://arxiv.org/abs/2312.02724 Rankzephyr: Effective and robust zero-shot listwise reranking is a breeze! Preprint, arXiv:2312.02724

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  24. [29]

    Sara Rosenthal, Yannis Katsis, Vraj Shah, Lihong He, Lucian Popa, and Marina Danilevsky. 2026 a . https://arxiv.org/abs/2602.23184 MTRAG-UN : A benchmark for open challenges in multi-turn RAG conversations . Preprint, arXiv:2602.23184

    work page arXiv 2026

  25. [30]

    Sara Rosenthal, Vraj Shah, Yannis Katsis, and Marina Danilevsky. 2026 b . SemEval -2026 task 8: MTRAGEval : Evaluating multi-turn RAG conversations. In Proceedings of the 20th International Workshop on Semantic Evaluation (SemEval-2026), San Diego, California. Association for Computational Linguistics

    2026

  26. [31]

    Weiwei Sun, Lingyong Yan, Xinyu Ma, Shuaiqiang Wang, Pengjie Ren, Zhumin Chen, Dawei Yin, and Zhaochun Ren. 2023. https://arxiv.org/abs/2304.09542 Is ChatGPT good at search? investigating large language models as re-ranking agents . In Proceedings of the 2023 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP). Association for Computati...

    work page arXiv 2023

  27. [32]

    Svitlana Vakulenko, Shayne Longpre, Zhucheng Tu, and Raviteja Anantha. 2021. Question rewriting for conversational question answering. In Proceedings of the 14th ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining (WSDM), pages 355--363. ACM

    2021

  28. [33]

    Liang Wang, Nan Yang, Xiaolong Huang, Linjun Yang, Rangan Majumder, and Furu Wei. 2024. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2024.acl-long.642 Improving text embeddings with large language models . In Proceedings of the 62nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers), pages 11897--11916, Bangkok, Thailand. Association f...

    work page doi:10.18653/v1/2024.acl-long.642 2024

  29. [34]

    Shengyao Zhuang, Honglei Zhuang, Bevan Koopman, and Guido Zuccon. 2024. https://doi.org/10.1145/3626772.3657813 A setwise approach for effective and highly efficient zero-shot ranking with large language models . In Proceedings of the 47th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval. ACM

    work page doi:10.1145/3626772.3657813 2024