Papers for

enterprise knowledge teams

Papers whose findings have a practical use for this group, as judged from the abstract. Open a paper to read what it means in practice.

Ragit enables better testing of document preprocessing for retrieval systems

RAGit: Turning Document Preprocessing into an Experimental Variable for RAG

Abstract: Document preprocessing choices can substantially affect retrieval in Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) pipelines, yet they are often selected heuristically and are difficult to compare under consistent conditions. We present RAGit, an open-source experimentation workbench for the systematic and reproducible evaluation of document preprocessing choices through downstream retrieval. RAGit represents parsing, chunking, indexing, retrieval, and evaluation as configurable experimental stages, enabling controlled comparisons while the remaining downstream settings are kept fixed. It preserves provenance from retrieved chunks to source pages and maps heterogeneous retrieval units to a common page-level ranking for evaluation. The current implementation supports multiple parsers and chunking strategies, dense and late-interaction retrieval, reusable intermediate artifacts, and multi-configuration benchmarking. We demonstrate RAGit through controlled experiments comparing alternative preprocessing configurations under a fixed retrieval setup, illustrating how preprocessing can be treated as an explicit experimental variable. RAGit and its documentation are publicly available on GitHub (https://github.com/OmarElbachyr/ragit). A demonstration video is available at https://youtu.be/tsst-Bhfz4I.

Sat 17 OctInformation Retrieval
The gist
Document preprocessing changes how search systems that help generate answers find the right information, but these changes are often chosen based on guesswork. The authors made RAGit, a tool that lets developers test different ways to prepare and split documents for these search systems under the same conditions. RAGit helps compare those methods fairly by controlling other settings and keeping track of where retrieved information originally came from. This makes it easier to understand how changing document preparation affects search results and answer quality.
Open → 2610.24659v1

LLM views improve search results by adjusting scores with overlap data

XViewRank: Overlap-Conditioned Score Fusion for LLM-Augmented Sparse Retrieval

Abstract: Large language models can reduce vocabulary mismatch in sparse retrieval by generating alternative views of a query. Once these views are searched independently, however, their ranked lists may be complementary, redundant, or affected by query drift, making fixed fusion suboptimal. We present XViewRank, a lightweight retrieval-side method for conditionally fusing BM25 results from an original query, a hypothesis view, and a step-back view. For each pooled candidate, XViewRank retains three normalized BM25 scores and three query-level overlaps between the retrieved result sets. A small nonlinear scorer uses the overlaps as context that changes how the view-specific scores are interpreted, without jointly encoding query and passage text. Under a matched-input protocol, XViewRank improves nDCG@10 and MAP numerically over reciprocal rank fusion on both TREC DL 2019 and 2020, with a statistically significant MAP gain on DL19. Additional analyses show that the clearest benefit occurs when the view rankings have low agreement, while the evidence on DL20 is weaker. The results support overlap-conditioned score fusion as a compact retrieval-side alternative to fixed fusion, while also delimiting where its advantage is empirically established.

Wed 14 OctInformation Retrieval
The gist
When searching for information, different versions of a question can be asked to find better answers. The authors show that combining search results from the original question and these variations using a method that considers how much the results overlap can improve ranking quality. Their approach, called XViewRank, changes how individual scores are used based on overlaps without needing complex language understanding of the text. Tests on standard search benchmarks found improvement in some cases, especially when the different question views returned quite different results.
Open → 2610.20122v1

Panini-DR improves deep research accuracy using multi-agent semantic workspaces

PANINI-DR: Controlled Deep Research through Generative Semantic Workspaces

Abstract: Deep research requires connecting multiple steps of search, reasoning, and computation, with intermediate findings guiding what to investigate next. As investigations grow, agents must maintain research state across model calls and check findings before errors propagate into subsequent work. We introduce PANINI-DR, a multi-agent harness that separates coordination of the overall investigation from the research and verification of individual subquestions. A shared workspace, built on the Generative Semantic Workspace representation, records subquestions, their dependencies, findings, and supporting evidence. Researchers investigate individual subquestions, while a separate verification agent checks proposed answers against those subquestions and their evidence. Verification feedback guides further investigation, and recorded findings inform subsequent assignments. We evaluate PANINI-DR on BrowseComp-Plus, FRAMES, and MoNaCo against seven state-of-the-art deep-research harnesses, all using a shared language-model backbone and frozen corpora. PANINI-DR achieves the strongest average performance across the three benchmarks. On BrowseComp-Plus, it achieves 73.3% accuracy, outperforming the next-best harness by 16.0 points. Its advantage is strongest on hard questions, where it answers nearly twice as many as the next-best harness. Ablations further show that structured planning and persistent state improve performance, as does checking each finding against its cited evidence before it is reused. Because a model can answer correctly from memory alone, we also analyze the evidence retained by each harness. PANINI-DR achieves the highest answer recoverability from saved evidence on all three benchmarks, while complementary claim-support audits show stronger evidence-backed answers. Accounting for this evidence changes how harnesses compare and further strengthens PANINI-DR's advantage.

Sat 10 OctComputation and LanguageArtificial IntelligenceInformation Retrieval
The gist
Figuring out complex questions often means breaking them into smaller parts and checking each carefully to avoid mistakes. The authors present PANINI-DR, a system that organizes these steps using different smart agents who ask questions, check answers, and keep track of all evidence in a shared workspace. This approach helps find better answers compared to other similar methods, especially on tough questions. PANINI-DR also keeps a detailed record of why each answer was chosen, helping make sure the results are trustworthy.
Open → 2610.15208v1

Recast learns to find and combine evidence for better AI answers

RECAST: Learning to Compute the Right Context through Adaptive Evidence Routing

Abstract: Large language models are increasingly applied to tasks grounded in long, heterogeneous information sources. Conventional Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) relies on fixed similarity-based retrieval, while agentic variants adapt queries and tool use but remain largely retrieval-centric. However, in many tasks, the evidence required for a solution is not explicitly present in any single source item. Instead, it must be derived through filtering, aggregation, or computation across multiple source items. In this work, we introduce RECAST (Routing Evidence through Computation, Access, and Synthesized Tools), a learned framework that formulates evidence construction as a sequential decision process over heterogeneous retrieval and computation operations, allowing evidence to be actively derived rather than merely retrieved. A lightweight RouterLM iteratively selects and formulates primitive operations or specifies customized operations for a frozen CompilerLM to translate into executable code. Once it judges the evidence sufficient, RouterLM passes the accepted evidence to a frozen AnswerLM to produce the final solution. We train RouterLM with supervised fine-tuning (SFT) followed by group relative policy optimization (GRPO). Across six heterogeneous benchmark families, RECAST achieves a mean success rate of 75.6%, outperforming the strongest large-model baseline by 15.9%. Moreover, training enables the Qwen3.5-9B RouterLM to outperform a training-free Gemini 3.5 Flash RouterLM by 5.0%. On three held-out benchmarks, RECAST improves over the strongest baseline by 15.0% on average, demonstrating strong zero-shot generalization across tasks and heterogeneous source representations.

Wed 7 OctArtificial Intelligence
The gist
Finding the right information to answer complicated questions often means combining bits from many sources, not just copying one answer. The authors created RECAST, a system that learns how to pick and link pieces of information and perform calculations step-by-step to build the final answer. It uses a smart controller to decide which actions to take and when enough evidence is found to give an answer. This approach works better than previous methods on many different tasks and can handle new kinds of problems without extra training.
Open → 2610.10507v1