Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 cited by

Mitigating Lost-in-Retrieval Problems in Retrieval Augmented Multi-Hop 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 2502.14245 v2 pith:QVCEMFL5 submitted 2025-02-20 cs.CL

classification cs.CL
keywords retrievalanswerschainraglost-in-retrievalmulti-hopquestionsub-questionanswer
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

In this paper, we identify a critical problem, "lost-in-retrieval", in retrieval-augmented multi-hop question answering (QA): the key entities are missed in LLMs' sub-question decomposition. "Lost-in-retrieval" significantly degrades the retrieval performance, which disrupts the reasoning chain and leads to the incorrect answers. To resolve this problem, we propose a progressive retrieval and rewriting method, namely ChainRAG, which sequentially handles each sub-question by completing missing key entities and retrieving relevant sentences from a sentence graph for answer generation. Each step in our retrieval and rewriting process builds upon the previous one, creating a seamless chain that leads to accurate retrieval and answers. Finally, all retrieved sentences and sub-question answers are integrated to generate a comprehensive answer to the original question. We evaluate ChainRAG on three multi-hop QA datasets - MuSiQue, 2Wiki, and HotpotQA - using three large language models: GPT4o-mini, Qwen2.5-72B, and GLM-4-Plus. Empirical results demonstrate that ChainRAG consistently outperforms baselines in both effectiveness and efficiency.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

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

  1. Curriculum Guided Reinforcement Learning for Efficient Multi Hop Retrieval Augmented Generation

    cs.CL 2025-05 reject novelty 5.0 of 10

    EVO-RAG applies curriculum-guided reinforcement learning with time-varying reward weights to multi-hop RAG, reporting improved EM on HotpotQA, 2WikiMultiHopQA, and MuSiQue.

  2. When Can Large Reasoning Models Save Thinking? Mechanistic Analysis of Behavioral Divergence in Reasoning

    cs.AI 2025-05 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    QwQ-32B under a save-thinking prompt exhibits three modes, no thinking, explicit thinking, and implicit thinking, with no-thinking saving tokens but losing accuracy while explicit and implicit thinking preserve accuracy.

  3. Question Decomposition for Retrieval-Augmented Generation

    cs.CL 2025-07 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    Splitting multi-hop questions into subquestions and reranking the merged retrieval pool improves RAG evidence coverage and answer accuracy on MultiHop-RAG and HotpotQA.

Pith tools