Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Lost-in-the-Middle in Long-Text Generation: Synthetic Dataset, Evaluation Framework, and Mitigation

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 2503.06868 v1 pith:XAVHY5GV submitted 2025-03-10 cs.CL cs.AI

classification cs.CLcs.AI
keywords long-textlost-in-the-middleral-writerbenchmarkdatasetevaluationexistingframework
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Existing long-text generation methods primarily concentrate on producing lengthy texts from short inputs, neglecting the long-input and long-output tasks. Such tasks have numerous practical applications while lacking available benchmarks. Moreover, as the input grows in length, existing methods inevitably encounter the "lost-in-the-middle" phenomenon. In this paper, we first introduce a Long Input and Output Benchmark (LongInOutBench), including a synthetic dataset and a comprehensive evaluation framework, addressing the challenge of the missing benchmark. We then develop the Retrieval-Augmented Long-Text Writer (RAL-Writer), which retrieves and restates important yet overlooked content, mitigating the "lost-in-the-middle" issue by constructing explicit prompts. We finally employ the proposed LongInOutBench to evaluate our RAL-Writer against comparable baselines, and the results demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach. Our code has been released at https://github.com/OnlyAR/RAL-Writer.

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. LIFEBench: Evaluating Length Instruction Following in Large Language Models

    cs.CL 2025-05 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    LIFEBench's evaluation of 26 LLMs shows most follow short length instructions but degrade sharply beyond a few hundred words, and none reliably hit vendor-claimed maximum output lengths.

Pith tools