Does RAG Know When Retrieval Is Wrong? Diagnosing Context Compliance under Knowledge Conflict

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.14473v2
• Date: Fri, 15 May 2026 03:01:37 GMT
• Title: Does RAG Know When Retrieval Is Wrong? Diagnosing Context Compliance under Knowledge Conflict
• Abstract summary: Context-Driven Decomposition (CDD) is a belief-decomposition probe that operates at inference time.<n>It serves as an intervention mechanism for controlled retrieval conflict.<n>These three patterns identify context-compliance as a structural axis along which standard RAG can be probed.
• Score: 7.091145002779077
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: The Context-Compliance Regime in Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) occurs when retrieved context dominates the final answer even when it conflicts with the model's parametric knowledge. Accuracy alone does not reveal how retrieved context causally shapes answers under such conflict. We introduce Context-Driven Decomposition (CDD), a belief-decomposition probe that operates at inference time and serves as an intervention mechanism for controlled retrieval conflict. Across Epi-Scale stress tests, TruthfulQA misconception injection, and cross-model reruns, CDD exposes three patterns. P1: context compliance is measurable in an upper-bound adversarial setting, where Standard RAG reaches 15.0% accuracy on TruthfulQA misconception injection (N=500). P2: adversarial accuracy gains transfer across model families -- CDD improves accuracy on Gemini-2.5-Flash and on Claude Haiku/Sonnet/Opus -- but rationale-answer causal coupling does not transfer. CDD reaches 64.1% mistake-injection causal sensitivity on Gemini-2.5-Flash, while sensitivities for all three Claude variants fall in the [-3%, +7%] range, suggesting that the Claude-side accuracy gains operate through a mechanism distinct from the explicit conflict-resolution trace. P3: explicit conflict decomposition improves robustness under temporal drift and noisy distractors, with CDD reaching 71.3% on temporal shifts and 69.9% on distractor evidence on the full Epi-Scale adversarial benchmark. These three patterns identify context-compliance as a structural axis along which standard RAG can be probed and intervened on, distinct from retrieval-quality or single-method robustness questions, and motivate releasing Epi-Scale for systematic study across model families and retrieval pipelines.

Related papers

• Not All Relations Are Equal: Relation-Balanced and Calibrated Graph Learning for Provenance-Based Intrusion Detection [66.44527094471619]
  We present RECAL, an unsupervised framework using relation-balanced masked graph learning to better capture rare interaction patterns.<n>On three DARPA E3 datasets, RECAL achieves F1 scores of 99.99%, 99.93%, and 99.99%, outperforming the best baseline on each dataset by 0.88, 0.82, and 0.42 percentage points, respectively.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-09-15T00:31:01Z)
• EvidentialRAG: Quantifying and Mitigating Information Conflict in Multi-Source Retrieval-Augmented Generation via Evidential Deep Learning [0.2730969268472861]
  This paper introduces ERAG, an uncertainty-aware RAG framework that converts retrieved chunks into probabilistic evidence before generation.<n>Experiments on CRAG, ConflictQA, and MuSiQue show that ERAG remains competitive with the strongest matched baseline on standard question answering.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-11T21:56:15Z)
• Agentic AI-based Framework for Mitigating Premature Diagnostic Handoff and Silent Hallucination in Healthcare Applications [17.69274632062373]
  Open-ended conversational agents remain prone to two critical failure modes: premature diagnostic handoff and silent clinical hallucinations.<n>We propose a multi-agent framework that addresses both issues by replacing LLM-as-a-judge'' routing with deterministic orchestration constraints.<n>We evaluate the system using simulated patient agents powered by the llama-3.1-70b-instruct model on 150 test cases.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-16T15:39:19Z)
• Three Regimes of Context-Parametric Conflict: A Predictive Framework and Empirical Validation [0.0]
  We study how large language models handle conflict between their training knowledge and a contradicting document.<n>We propose a three-regime framework: Regime 1 (single-source updating), Regime 2 (competitive integration), and Regime 3 (task-appropriate selection)<n>We validate the framework across Claude Sonnet 4.6, GPT-5.5, Gemini 2.5 Flash, Llama 4 Maverick, and DeepSeek V3 using 9,970 API calls in three experimental phases.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-12T06:00:48Z)
• Adaptive Consensus in LLM Ensembles via Sequential Evidence Accumulation: Automatic Budget Identification and Calibrated Commit Signals [0.3384279376065155]
  Large Language Model ensembles improve reasoning accuracy up to a performance boundary; beyond it, additional deliberation degrades accuracy.<n>We introduce DASE (Deliberative Adaptive Stopping Ensemble), an ensemble that commits early on genuine consensus and applies a global-frequency fallback on fragmented evidence.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-05T19:24:10Z)
• Towards Trustworthy Depression Estimation via Disentangled Evidential Learning [50.22167852149165]
  We propose EviDep, an evidential learning framework that jointly quantifies depression severity.<n>EviDep enforces strict information integrity to guarantee robust evidence synthesis.<n>It achieves state-of-the-art predictive accuracy and superior uncertainty calibration, delivering a robust fail-safe mechanism for trustworthy clinical screening.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-17T13:27:11Z)
• Benchmarking Multi-turn Medical Diagnosis: Hold, Lure, and Self-Correction [72.89352076103889]
  Large language models (LLMs) achieve high accuracy in medical diagnosis when all clinical information is provided in a single turn.<n>We introduce MINT, a high-fidelity, multi-turn medical diagnosis benchmark comprising 1,035 cases.<n>We uncover three persistent behavioral patterns that significantly impact diagnostic decisions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-06T00:23:10Z)
• TRIAGE: Type-Routed Interventions via Aleatoric-Epistemic Gated Estimation in Robotic Manipulation and Adaptive Perception -- Don't Treat All Uncertainty the Same [2.755751829139168]
  Most uncertainty-aware robotic systems collapse prediction uncertainty into a single scalar score and use it to trigger uniform corrective responses.<n>This aggregation obscures whether uncertainty arises from corrupted observations or from mismatch between the learned model and the true system dynamics.<n>We introduce a lightweight post hoc framework that decomposes uncertainty into aleatoric and epistemic components and uses these signals to regulate system responses at inference time.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-09T09:07:43Z)
• Agentic retrieval-augmented reasoning reshapes collective reliability under model variability in radiology question answering [1.295312759062166]
  Agentic retrieval-augmented reasoning pipelines are increasingly used to structure how large language models incorporate external evidence in clinical decision support.<n>These systems iteratively retrieve curated domain knowledge and synthesize it into structured reports before answer selection.<n>Although such pipelines can improve performance, their impact on reliability under model variability remains unclear.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-06T13:31:54Z)
• Information Fidelity in Tool-Using LLM Agents: A Martingale Analysis of the Model Context Protocol [69.11739400975445]
  We introduce the first theoretical framework for analyzing error accumulation in Model Context Protocol (MCP) agents.<n>We show that cumulative distortion exhibits linear growth and high-probability deviations bounded by $O(sqrtT)$.<n>Key findings include: semantic weighting reduces distortion by 80%, and periodic re-grounding approximately every 9 steps suffices for error control.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-10T21:08:53Z)
• From Conflict to Consensus: Boosting Medical Reasoning via Multi-Round Agentic RAG [65.0203623486525]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) exhibit high reasoning capacity in medical question-answering.<n>Their tendency to produce hallucinations and outdated knowledge poses critical risks in healthcare fields.<n>Existing methods rely on noisy token-level signals and lack the multi-round refinement required for complex reasoning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-06T08:25:30Z)
• Decomposed Prompting Does Not Fix Knowledge Gaps, But Helps Models Say "I Don't Know" [47.930782177987446]
  Large language models often struggle to recognize their knowledge limits in closed-book question answering, leading to confident hallucinations.<n>We evaluate three task-equivalent prompting regimes: Direct, Assistive, and Incremental, across different model scales and multi-hop QA benchmarks.<n>Because factual knowledge is stable while hallucinations are agreement, cross-regime provides a precise signal of internal uncertainty.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-04T18:39:58Z)
• Seeing through the Conflict: Transparent Knowledge Conflict Handling in Retrieval-Augmented Generation [12.469991196570106]
  TCR (Transparent Conflict Resolution) disentangles semantic match and factual consistency via dual contrastive encoders.<n>It raises knowledge-gap recovery by +21.4 pp and cuts misleading-context overrides by -29.3 pp, while adding only 0.3% parameters.<n>The signals align with human judgements and expose temporal decision patterns.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-11T10:08:49Z)
• Nonparametric Identifiability of Causal Representations from Unknown Interventions [63.1354734978244]
  We study causal representation learning, the task of inferring latent causal variables and their causal relations from mixtures of the variables. Our goal is to identify both the ground truth latents and their causal graph up to a set of ambiguities which we show to be irresolvable from interventional data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-01T10:51:58Z)

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.