BalanceRAG: Joint Risk Calibration for Cascaded Retrieval-Augmented Generation

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.20084v1
• Date: Tue, 19 May 2026 16:38:55 GMT
• Title: BalanceRAG: Joint Risk Calibration for Cascaded Retrieval-Augmented Generation
• Abstract summary: Large language models (LLMs) can enhance factuality via retrieval-augmented generation (RAG)<n>Applying RAG to every query is unnecessary when the model-only answer is reliable.<n>We develop BalanceRAG to certify threshold pairs at a target risk level.
• Score: 8.129733777508434
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) can enhance factuality via retrieval-augmented generation (RAG), but applying RAG to every query is unnecessary when the model-only answer is reliable. This motivates cascaded RAG: each query is first handled by an LLM-only branch, escalated to a RAG fallback only if the primary branch is uncertain, and abstained from when neither branch is sufficiently trustworthy. However, calibrating such cascades stage by stage may be conservative, since the final utility depends on joint uncertainty thresholding of LLM-only and RAG. In this work, we develop BalanceRAG to certify threshold pairs at a target risk level. Given uncertainty scores from the two branches, BalanceRAG frames each threshold pair as an operating point on a two-dimensional lattice and identifies safe operating points using sequential graphical testing. This enables risk-adaptive threshold calibration, controlling the system-level error rate among accepted points, while retaining more examples. Furthermore, BalanceRAG extends to multi-risk calibration, allowing retrieval usage to be bounded together with the selection-conditioned risk. Experiments on three open-domain question answering (QA) benchmarks across multiple LLM backbones demonstrate that BalanceRAG meets prescribed risk levels, preserves higher coverage and more accepted correct examples, and reduces unnecessary retrieval calls compared with always-on RAG.

Related papers

• When RLVR Shrinks the Reasoning Boundary: Diagnosing Pass@k Inversion [0.0]
  Reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) can improve one-sample accuracy while making a model worse under repeated sampling.<n>We study this pass@k inversion: after training, the policy may solve fewer distinct problems than its base model at large $k$.<n>The failure concentrates on boundary prompts, where the base model contains rare correct trajectories that are recoverable by sampling but too sparse to reliably appear in finite RLVR rollout groups.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-12T17:17:18Z)
• Certified Policy Optimisation for Nested Causal Bandits via PAC-Bayes Risk [0.0]
  We formalise the problem class as Nested Contextual Causal Bandits (NCCBs)<n>Our main theoretical result is a causal PAC-Bayesian excess-risk bound that certifies any candidate deployment policy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-28T11:39:51Z)
• Beyond Semantic Relevance: Counterfactual Risk Minimization for Robust Retrieval-Augmented Generation [19.888565537472363]
  CoRM-RAG (Counterfactual Risk Minimization for RAG) is a framework that aligns retrieval with decision safety rather than mere similarity.<n>We introduce a Cognitive Perturbation Protocol to simulate user biases during training, which is then distilled into a lightweight Evidence Critic.<n>This scoring module learns to identify documents that possess sufficient evidential strength to steer the model toward correctness despite adversarial query perturbations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-02T07:22:24Z)
• URAG: A Benchmark for Uncertainty Quantification in Retrieval-Augmented Large Language Models [35.441039437111606]
  URAG is a benchmark designed to assess the uncertainty of RAG systems across various fields like healthcare, programming, science, math, and general text.<n>We apply the evaluation pipeline to 8 standard RAG methods, measuring their performance through both accuracy and prediction-set sizes based on LAC and APS metrics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-02T00:22:06Z)
• CARE What Fails: Contrastive Anchored-REflection for Verifiable Multimodal [84.71254539482369]
  Group-relative reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) often wastes the most informative data it already has the failures.<n>We present CARE, a failure-centric post-training framework for multimodal reasoning that turns errors into supervision.<n> CARE improves accuracy and training smoothness while explicitly increasing the share of learning signal that comes from failures.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-22T16:34:21Z)
• LEC: Linear Expectation Constraints for False-Discovery Control in Selective Prediction and Routing Systems [95.35293543918762]
  Large language models (LLMs) often generate unreliable answers, while uncertainty methods fail to fully distinguish correct from incorrect predictions.<n>We address this issue through the lens of false discovery rate (FDR) control, ensuring that among all accepted predictions, the proportion of errors does not exceed a target risk level.<n>We propose LEC, which reinterprets selective prediction as a constrained decision problem by enforcing a Linear Expectation Constraint.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-01T11:27:09Z)
• Unsupervised Conformal Inference: Bootstrapping and Alignment to Control LLM Uncertainty [49.19257648205146]
  We propose an unsupervised conformal inference framework for generation.<n>Our gates achieve close-to-nominal coverage and provide tighter, more stable thresholds than split UCP.<n>The result is a label-free, API-compatible gate for test-time filtering.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-26T23:40:47Z)
• SIRAG: Towards Stable and Interpretable RAG with A Process-Supervised Multi-Agent Framework [7.37561751991963]
  We propose a process-supervised multi-agent framework to bridge the gap between retriever and generator.<n>The proposed framework is modular and plug-and-play, requiring no modification to the retriever or generator.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-17T09:09:28Z)
• COIN: Uncertainty-Guarding Selective Question Answering for Foundation Models with Provable Risk Guarantees [51.5976496056012]
  COIN is an uncertainty-guarding selection framework that calibrates statistically valid thresholds to filter a single generated answer per question.<n>COIN estimates the empirical error rate on a calibration set and applies confidence interval methods to establish a high-probability upper bound on the true error rate.<n>We demonstrate COIN's robustness in risk control, strong test-time power in retaining admissible answers, and predictive efficiency under limited calibration data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-25T07:04:49Z)
• Retrieval is Not Enough: Enhancing RAG Reasoning through Test-Time Critique and Optimization [58.390885294401066]
  Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) has become a widely adopted paradigm for enabling knowledge-grounded large language models (LLMs)<n>RAG pipelines often fail to ensure that model reasoning remains consistent with the evidence retrieved, leading to factual inconsistencies or unsupported conclusions.<n>We propose AlignRAG, a novel iterative framework grounded in Critique-Driven Alignment (CDA)<n>We introduce AlignRAG-auto, an autonomous variant that dynamically terminates refinement, removing the need to pre-specify the number of critique iterations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-21T04:56:47Z)
• Controlling Risk of Retrieval-augmented Generation: A Counterfactual Prompting Framework [77.45983464131977]
  We focus on how likely it is that a RAG model's prediction is incorrect, resulting in uncontrollable risks in real-world applications.<n>Our research identifies two critical latent factors affecting RAG's confidence in its predictions.<n>We develop a counterfactual prompting framework that induces the models to alter these factors and analyzes the effect on their answers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-24T14:52:14Z)
• CONFLARE: CONFormal LArge language model REtrieval [0.0]
  Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) frameworks enable large language models (LLMs) to retrieve relevant information from a knowledge base and incorporate it into the context for generating responses. RAG does not guarantee valid responses if retrieval fails to identify the necessary information as the context for response generation. We introduce a four-step framework for applying conformal prediction to quantify retrieval uncertainty in RAG frameworks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-04T02:58:21Z)

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.