ArbGraph: Conflict-Aware Evidence Arbitration for Reliable Long-Form Retrieval-Augmented Generation

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.18362v1
• Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2026 14:51:43 GMT
• Title: ArbGraph: Conflict-Aware Evidence Arbitration for Reliable Long-Form Retrieval-Augmented Generation
• Abstract summary: ArbGraph is a framework for pre-generation evidence arbitration in long-form RAG.<n>ArbGraph decomposes retrieved documents into atomic claims and organizes them into a conflict-aware evidence graph.<n>We show that ArbGraph consistently improves factual recall and information density while reducing hallucinations and sensitivity to retrieval noise.
• Score: 47.25596369834373
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) remains unreliable in long-form settings, where retrieved evidence is noisy or contradictory, making it difficult for RAG pipelines to maintain factual consistency. Existing approaches focus on retrieval expansion or verification during generation, leaving conflict resolution entangled with generation. To address this limitation, we propose ArbGraph, a framework for pre-generation evidence arbitration in long-form RAG that explicitly resolves factual conflicts. ArbGraph decomposes retrieved documents into atomic claims and organizes them into a conflict-aware evidence graph with explicit support and contradiction relations. On top of this graph, we introduce an intensity-driven iterative arbitration mechanism that propagates credibility signals through evidence interactions, enabling the system to suppress unreliable and inconsistent claims before final generation. In this way, ArbGraph separates evidence validation from text generation and provides a coherent evidence foundation for downstream long-form generation. We evaluate ArbGraph on two widely used long-form RAG benchmarks, LongFact and RAGChecker, using multiple large language model backbones. Experimental results show that ArbGraph consistently improves factual recall and information density while reducing hallucinations and sensitivity to retrieval noise. Additional analyses show that these gains are evident under conflicting or ambiguous evidence, highlighting the effectiveness of evidence-level conflict resolution for improving the reliability of long-form RAG. The implementation is publicly available at https://github.com/1212Judy/ArbGraph.

Related papers

• Navigating Sparse Evidence: Agentic Visual RAG via Explicit Context Selection and Consolidation [50.92223196290564]
  We propose a unified agent loop for explicit evidence selection and consolidation.<n>During exploration, SCoRE retains only query-relevant observations and their source pointers in a maintained textual ledger.<n>At termination, it reloads the referenced original images and consolidates the visual evidence for answering, arranging it into a logical sequence.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-09-14T16:11:35Z)
• SAGE: From Direct Answering to Evidence-Grounded Inference for Chinese Ancient Document Understanding [61.02068339726333]
  We propose SAGE, an evidence-grounded multi-agent framework for Chinese ancient document understanding.<n>SAGE coordinates specialized agents for task-aware planning, tool-mediated evidence acquisition, claim-level verification, and bounded replanning.<n> Experiments on the AncientDoc benchmark show that SAGE consistently outperforms matched direct-answering baselines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-25T03:01:51Z)
• GraphLoom: Reliability-Calibrated Graph Evidence Routing for Multimodal KG-RAG [4.035350563640088]
  We present GraphLoom, a reliability-calibrated multimodal knowledge-graph RAG framework for compact and faithful evidence routing.<n>Instead of injecting all retrieved evidence into the generator, GraphLoom performs reliability-aware subgraph retrieval.<n>We show consistent gains in answer quality and evidence faithfulness over strong multimodal RAG, graph-retrieval, and open-source vision-language baselines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-15T06:02:23Z)
• HiEviDR-Bench: A Benchmark for Hierarchical Evidence Aggregation in Deep Research [52.87128503345243]
  We introduce HiEviDR-Bench, a benchmark for evaluating Hierarchical Evidence Aggregation in Deep Research.<n>HiEviDR-Bench represents each instance with an explicit evidence graph that captures evidence selection, cross-source linking, and aggregation.<n>We develop a traceability-oriented evaluation framework with five dimensions: report quality, evidence traceability, citation accuracy, claim verification, and answer correctness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-27T23:50:46Z)
• Copy Less, Ground More: Overcoming Repetitive Copying in Long-Context Reasoning via Evidence-Aware Reinforcement Learning [42.17614767170884]
  We show that models extensively copy text from the input into their reasoning traces rather than productively solving the problem.<n>By separating each prompt into task-relevant key evidence and irrelevant distractor context, we show that the root cause is insufficient grounding.<n>Motivated by this diagnosis, we propose GEAR, a reward shaping method that augments the accuracy signal with a grounding reward for overlap with key evidence and a distractor penalty for overlap with irrelevant context.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-21T17:59:21Z)
• DRNOISE: Benchmarking Deep Research Agents in Misleading Evidence Environments [51.049999642138]
  We introduce DRNOISE, a 100-task benchmark for answer recovery under misleading evidence.<n>Each task has a unique gold answer supported by two corroborating indirect record chains; the paired noisy condition adds one plausible document that states a conflicting answer directly.<n>Across agents with strong clean-task performance, this single intervention causes 66-88 percentage-point accuracy drops.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-19T15:20:40Z)
• VeriGraph: Towards Verifiable Data-Analytic Agents [71.17693022916896]
  LLM-based agents have demonstrated strong capabilities in data-intensive analytical tasks, yet their outputs are rarely verifiable.<n>We propose VeriGraph, a traceable neuro-symbolic reasoning framework that enables agents to construct an explicit heterogeneous evidence directed acyclic graph.<n>Our results suggest that explicit evidence-graph construction is a promising path toward verifiable data-analytic agents.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-15T11:50:56Z)
• Auditable Graph-Guided Root Cause Analysis for Kubernetes Incidents [1.116726665785374]
  We present Graph Traversal Agent, a graph-guided RCA agent that combines LLM reasoning with specialized tools.<n>We map operational constraints, including read-only evidence collection, propagation-aware diagnosis, bounded execution, and independently validated verdicts.<n>On ITBench snapshots scored by one fixed qwen-plus judge, the audited system raises root-cause-entity F1 over an earlier iteration of the same system.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-07T12:05:09Z)
• Why Retrieval-Augmented Generation Fails: A Graph Perspective [40.34482080762174]
  We present a model-internal study of retrieval-augmented generation that examines how retrieved evidence influences answer generation.<n>We develop a graph-based error detection framework that uses attribution-graph topology features.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-13T23:18:07Z)
• Stateful Evidence-Driven Retrieval-Augmented Generation with Iterative Reasoning [7.701766930531068]
  Stateful Evidence-Driven RAG with Iterative Reasoning is a framework that models question answering as a progressive evidence accumulation process.<n>The framework performs evidence-driven deficiency analysis to identify gaps and conflicts and iteratively refines queries to guide subsequent retrieval.<n> Experiments on multiple question answering benchmarks demonstrate consistent improvements over standard RAG and multi-step baselines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-25T06:57:49Z)
• The Alignment Bottleneck in Decomposition-Based Claim Verification [17.197804072440665]
  We introduce a new dataset of real-world complex claims featuring temporally bounded evidence and human-annotated sub-claim evidence spans.<n>We evaluate decomposition under two evidence alignment setups: Sub-claim Aligned Evidence (SAE) and Repeated Claim-level Evidence (SRE)<n>Our results reveal that decomposition brings significant performance improvement only when evidence is granular and strictly aligned.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-11T00:02:16Z)
• PruneRAG: Confidence-Guided Query Decomposition Trees for Efficient Retrieval-Augmented Generation [19.832367438725306]
  PruneRAG builds a structured query decomposition tree to perform stable and efficient reasoning.<n>We define the Evidence Forgetting Rate as a metric to quantify cases where golden evidence is retrieved but not correctly used.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-16T06:38:17Z)
• CDF-RAG: Causal Dynamic Feedback for Adaptive Retrieval-Augmented Generation [3.8808821719659763]
  We introduce Causal Dynamic Feedback for Adaptive Retrieval-Augmented Generation (CDF-RAG)<n>CDF-RAG iteratively refines queries, retrieves structured causal graphs, and enables multi-hop causal reasoning across interconnected knowledge sources.<n>We evaluate CDF-RAG on four diverse datasets, demonstrating its ability to improve response accuracy and causal correctness over existing RAG-based methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-17T01:15:13Z)
• A Graph-based Verification Framework for Fact-Checking [25.875698681028794]
  We propose a graph-based framework, GraphFC, for fact-checking.<n>Based on this core idea, we propose a graph-based framework, GraphFC, for fact-checking.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-10T13:02:29Z)
• FIRE: Fact-checking with Iterative Retrieval and Verification [63.67320352038525]
  FIRE is a novel framework that integrates evidence retrieval and claim verification in an iterative manner.<n>It achieves slightly better performance while reducing large language model (LLM) costs by an average of 7.6 times and search costs by 16.5 times.<n>These results indicate that FIRE holds promise for application in large-scale fact-checking operations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-17T06:44:18Z)
• Factual Error Correction for Abstractive Summaries Using Entity Retrieval [57.01193722520597]
  We propose an efficient factual error correction system RFEC based on entities retrieval post-editing process. RFEC retrieves the evidence sentences from the original document by comparing the sentences with the target summary. Next, RFEC detects the entity-level errors in the summaries by considering the evidence sentences and substitutes the wrong entities with the accurate entities from the evidence sentences.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-04-18T11:35:02Z)
• GERE: Generative Evidence Retrieval for Fact Verification [57.78768817972026]
  We propose GERE, the first system that retrieves evidences in a generative fashion. The experimental results on the FEVER dataset show that GERE achieves significant improvements over the state-of-the-art baselines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-04-12T03:49:35Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.