Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Can't Remember Details in Long Documents? You Need Some R&R

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 2403.05004 v1 pith:BYWMLJRF submitted 2024-03-08 cs.CL cs.AIcs.IRcs.LG

classification cs.CLcs.AIcs.IRcs.LG
keywords contextdocumentslongtextitaccuracydocument-basedinstructionsmethods
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
abstract

Long-context large language models (LLMs) hold promise for tasks such as question-answering (QA) over long documents, but they tend to miss important information in the middle of context documents (arXiv:2307.03172v3). Here, we introduce $\textit{R&R}$ -- a combination of two novel prompt-based methods called $\textit{reprompting}$ and $\textit{in-context retrieval}$ (ICR) -- to alleviate this effect in document-based QA. In reprompting, we repeat the prompt instructions periodically throughout the context document to remind the LLM of its original task. In ICR, rather than instructing the LLM to answer the question directly, we instruct it to retrieve the top $k$ passage numbers most relevant to the given question, which are then used as an abbreviated context in a second QA prompt. We test R&R with GPT-4 Turbo and Claude-2.1 on documents up to 80k tokens in length and observe a 16-point boost in QA accuracy on average. Our further analysis suggests that R&R improves performance on long document-based QA because it reduces the distance between relevant context and the instructions. Finally, we show that compared to short-context chunkwise methods, R&R enables the use of larger chunks that cost fewer LLM calls and output tokens, while minimizing the drop in accuracy.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. CTG-Insight: A Multi-Agent Interpretable LLM Framework for Cardiotocography Analysis and Classification

    cs.LG 2025-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    CTG-Insight reports 96.4% accuracy on a 50-sample subset of the NeuroFetalNet test set, but the comparison against deep learning baselines is uneven and the system code and exact prompts are not released.

Pith tools