Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 cited by

Learning to Retrieve Reasoning Paths over Wikipedia Graph for Question Answering

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 1911.10470 v2 pith:55LSX7YT submitted 2019-11-24 cs.CL

classification cs.CL
keywords reasoningmodelpathsretrieveansweransweringbestdocuments
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Answering questions that require multi-hop reasoning at web-scale necessitates retrieving multiple evidence documents, one of which often has little lexical or semantic relationship to the question. This paper introduces a new graph-based recurrent retrieval approach that learns to retrieve reasoning paths over the Wikipedia graph to answer multi-hop open-domain questions. Our retriever model trains a recurrent neural network that learns to sequentially retrieve evidence paragraphs in the reasoning path by conditioning on the previously retrieved documents. Our reader model ranks the reasoning paths and extracts the answer span included in the best reasoning path. Experimental results show state-of-the-art results in three open-domain QA datasets, showcasing the effectiveness and robustness of our method. Notably, our method achieves significant improvement in HotpotQA, outperforming the previous best model by more than 14 points.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Evidence Interfaces Shape How Retrieval-Augmented Readers Use Support

    cs.AI 2026-07 accept novelty 7.0 of 10

    Top-k retrieval scores should be reported with complete-support coverage, because the same score can mix missing-support failures with reader-side interface effects.

  2. Beyond Top-K: Replacing Black-Box Retrieval with Interpretable Agentic Operations

    cs.AI 2026-08 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    On a 780-page financial report, an agentic grep-and-read interface (READ) answers 58.8% of 51 verified questions, beating tuned dense retrieval (35.3%) and matching BM25.

  3. HyCE-RAG: Hypergraph Chain-of-Evidence Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Explainable Multi-hop Question Answering

    cs.AI 2026-06 reject novelty 5.0 of 10

    Organizing retrieved evidence into confidence-scored hypergraph chains is reported to lift multi-hop QA accuracy, context relevance, and faithfulness by 11–30 points over vector and graph RAG baselines on five benchmarks.

  4. GOSU: Retrieval-Augmented Generation with Global-Level Optimized Semantic Unit-Centric Framework

    cs.CL 2025-08 reject novelty 5.0 of 10

    GOSU globally merges semantic units from text chunks into a unit-centric knowledge graph and uses three-tier keyword retrieval to improve RAG generation quality, according to LLM-judge win rates.

Pith tools