Pith. sign in

REVIEW 11 cited by

Auto-RAG: Autonomous Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Large Language Models

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 2411.19443 v1 pith:GYXRTDKE submitted 2024-11-29 cs.CL

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

Iterative retrieval refers to the process in which the model continuously queries the retriever during generation to enhance the relevance of the retrieved knowledge, thereby improving the performance of Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG). Existing work typically employs few-shot prompting or manually constructed rules to implement iterative retrieval. This introduces additional inference overhead and overlooks the remarkable reasoning capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs). In this paper, we introduce Auto-RAG, an autonomous iterative retrieval model centered on the LLM's powerful decision-making capabilities. Auto-RAG engages in multi-turn dialogues with the retriever, systematically planning retrievals and refining queries to acquire valuable knowledge. This process continues until sufficient external information is gathered, at which point the results are presented to the user. To this end, we develop a method for autonomously synthesizing reasoning-based decision-making instructions in iterative retrieval and fine-tuned the latest open-source LLMs. The experimental results indicate that Auto-RAG is capable of autonomous iterative interaction with the retriever, effectively leveraging the remarkable reasoning and decision-making abilities of LLMs, which lead to outstanding performance across six benchmarks. Further analysis reveals that Auto-RAG can autonomously adjust the number of iterations based on the difficulty of the questions and the utility of the retrieved knowledge, without requiring any human intervention. Moreover, Auto-RAG expresses the iterative retrieval process in natural language, enhancing interpretability while providing users with a more intuitive experience\footnote{Code is available at \url{https://github.com/ictnlp/Auto-RAG}.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 11 Pith papers

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

  1. Evaluating Memory in LLM Agents via Incremental Multi-Turn Interactions

    cs.CL 2025-07 unverdicted novelty 7.0 of 10

    MemoryAgentBench is a new multi-turn benchmark assessing four memory competencies in LLM agents—accurate retrieval, test-time learning, long-range understanding, and selective forgetting—showing that existing methods ...

  2. Subjective-Graph LLM Agents for Simulating Uncertainty in Classroom Social Perception

    cs.AI 2026-03 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Subjective-graph LLM agents on 12 real classrooms accumulate collective ranking error from 0.066 to 0.124 over six exams despite repeated score anchors.

  3. Chain-of-Agents: End-to-End Agent Foundation Models via Multi-Agent Distillation and Agentic RL

    cs.AI 2025-08 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A single LLM is trained with multi-agent distilled trajectories plus agentic RL, and the resulting Chain-of-Agents models set state-of-the-art Pass@1 scores among tool-integrated reasoning methods on GAIA, BrowseComp,...

  4. Self-Critique Guided Iterative Reasoning for Multi-hop Question Answering

    cs.CL 2025-05 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    SiGIR trains a language model to decompose multi-hop questions, self-critique each retrieval and reasoning step, and use cumulative self-rewards in a beam search, beating prior methods by up to 14.4 F1 points on MuSiQue.

  5. C-3PO: Compact Plug-and-Play Proxy Optimization to Achieve Human-like Retrieval-Augmented Generation

    cs.CL 2025-02 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A 0.5-1.5B parameter proxy with three cooperating agents, trained by reinforcement learning with tree-structured rollouts, improves RAG question answering by 8-13 points on multi-hop datasets without changing the retr...

  6. 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.

  7. Atom-Searcher: Enhancing Agentic Deep Research via Fine-Grained Atomic Thought Reward

    cs.CL 2025-08 unverdicted novelty 5.0 of 10

    A new RL framework that rewards fine-grained reasoning steps, called Atomic Thoughts, claims better agentic deep research on seven benchmarks.

  8. ComposeRAG: A Modular and Composable RAG for Corpus-Grounded Multi-Hop Question Answering

    cs.CL 2025-05 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    A modular, verifier-driven RAG pipeline with iterative re-decomposition outperforms fine-tuned and agentic baselines on four multi-hop QA benchmarks.

  9. EvolveSearch: An Iterative Self-Evolving Search Agent

    cs.CL 2025-05 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    An iterative loop of RL and filtered SFT on the agent's own rollouts improves a 7B web-search agent by a few accuracy points on multi-hop QA benchmarks.

  10. Removal of Hallucination on Hallucination: Debate-Augmented RAG

    cs.CL 2025-05 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    DRAG adds structured multi-agent debates to both the retrieval and generation stages of RAG, improving multi-hop QA accuracy while showing mixed single-hop results.

  11. Deep Research Agents: A Systematic Examination And Roadmap

    cs.AI 2025-06 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    A survey that organizes LLM-powered deep research agents into static versus dynamic workflows and single versus multi agent architectures, and reviews their benchmarks and open challenges.

Pith tools