AB-RAG: Adaptive Budgeted Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Reliable Question Answering

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2606.29090v1
• Date: Sat, 27 Jun 2026 21:08:14 GMT
• Title: AB-RAG: Adaptive Budgeted Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Reliable Question Answering
• Abstract summary: AB-RAG is a training-free and backbone-agnostic framework that generates an answer.<n>It estimates its confidence from a combination of three signals.<n>It then decides whether to stop or to retrieve more evidence.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) has become the standard way to ground large language models in external knowledge, yet most systems retrieve a fixed number of passages for every question regardless of its difficulty. This wastes computation on easy questions, starves hard ones, and gives no signal for when a generated answer can be trusted. With a growing share of question answering systems built on top of commercial language model APIs, a method that can decide how much to retrieve, and how far to trust its own answers, without retraining the underlying model, is of clear practical value. This paper presents AB-RAG (Adaptive Budgeted Retrieval-Augmented Generation), a training-free and backbone-agnostic framework that generates an answer, estimates its confidence from a combination of three signals, and then decides whether to stop or to retrieve more evidence, subject to a fixed retrieval budget. The estimator combines the model's own certainty, the agreement between the answer and the evidence, and the variance of the retrieval scores. For models that expose token probabilities the certainty signal is read directly; for closed APIs it is approximated by self-consistency, so the method works without access to model internals. Across three backbones and two datasets, the central result is that the confidence estimate reliably separates correct from incorrect answers on every backbone, reaching a clean split of 57.6% against 0% Exact Match between high- and low-confidence answers on a factoid dataset. The adaptive policy improves accuracy on capable backbones, and the study reports its negative and nuanced findings honestly, including a confidence signal that proved unsuitable for short answers and a retrieval signal whose sign was found and corrected through measurement. The entire study was carried out on a single consumer laptop with only a few dollars of API spend.

Related papers

• Evaluating Confidence-Gated Retrieval with Matched Trajectory Replay [3.888537003098864]
  We propose matched trajectory replay, a controlled protocol for comparing confidence-to-action mappings.<n>We use it to compare raw verbalized confidence with post-hoc isotonic calibration in a multi-hop question-answering system.<n>Overall accuracy improves by up to 15 percentage points on HotpotQA but falls by up to 17 percentage points on MuSiQue.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-27T09:15:33Z)
• 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)
• Boosting Self-Consistency with Ranking [56.38798757709555]
  Self-consistency improves large language models by sampling multiple reasoning paths and selecting the most frequent answer.<n>We address this limitation with Ranking-Improved Self-Consistency (RISC), which reformulates answer selection in self-consistency as a ranking problem.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-03T16:12:30Z)
• Causal Algorithmic Recourse: Foundations and Methods [57.73269033551628]
  Key feature of AI systems is the ability to provide recommendations for how an individual may reverse a negative decision.<n>Existing approaches treat recourse outcomes as counterfactuals of a fixed unit.<n>We develop a causal framework that models recourse as a process over pre- and post-intervention outcomes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-12T00:55:19Z)
• Towards Dependable Retrieval-Augmented Generation Using Factual Confidence Prediction [0.28932261919131014]
  It is critical to associate meaningful confidence measures about the factuality of the retrieval process with the generated answers.<n>We present a new, two-staged approach to predict fact faithfulness of the output of retrieval-augmented generations.<n>Our work helps to establish a novel type of certified RAG systems for a broad range of natural language industry applications.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-04T11:28:19Z)
• Epistemic Observability in Language Models [0.0]
  We find that models report highest confidence precisely when they are fabricating.<n>We prove, under formal assumptions, that this is not a capability gap but an observational one.<n>We construct a tensor interface that escapes the impossibility by exporting computational byproducts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-20T21:59:34Z)
• Confidence Before Answering: A Paradigm Shift for Efficient LLM Uncertainty Estimation [47.91529693614168]
  Existing methods are predominantly answer-first, producing confidence only after generating an answer.<n>We study a confidence-first paradigm, where the model outputs its confidence before answering, interpreting this score as the model's probability of answering the question correctly.<n>We propose CoCA, a reinforcement learning framework that jointly optimize confidence calibration and answer accuracy via segmented credit assignment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-06T04:03:13Z)
• GRACE: Reinforcement Learning for Grounded Response and Abstention under Contextual Evidence [9.80421132842862]
  Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) integrates external knowledge to enhance Large Language Models (LLMs)<n>RAG is susceptible to two critical flaws: providing correct answers without explicit grounded evidence and producing fabricated responses when the retrieved context is insufficient.<n>We propose GRACE, a reinforcement-learning framework that simultaneously mitigates both types of flaws.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-08T02:47:33Z)
• Reference-Free Rating of LLM Responses via Latent Information [53.463883683503106]
  We study the common practice of asking a judge model to assign Likert-scale scores to free-text responses.<n>We then propose and evaluate Latent Judges, which derive scalar ratings from internal model signals.<n>Across a broad suite of pairwise and single-rating benchmarks, latent methods match or surpass standard prompting.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-29T12:15:52Z)
• Divide-Then-Align: Honest Alignment based on the Knowledge Boundary of RAG [51.120170062795566]
  We propose Divide-Then-Align (DTA) to endow RAG systems with the ability to respond with "I don't know" when the query is out of the knowledge boundary.<n>DTA balances accuracy with appropriate abstention, enhancing the reliability and trustworthiness of retrieval-augmented systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-27T08:21:21Z)
• Graph-based Confidence Calibration for Large Language Models [22.394717844099684]
  We propose using an auxiliary learning model to assess response correctness based on the self-consistency of multiple outputs generated by the large language models.<n>Our method builds a consistency graph to represent the agreement among multiple responses and uses a graph neural network (GNN) to estimate the likelihood that each response is correct.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-03T20:36:44Z)
• Realistic Conversational Question Answering with Answer Selection based on Calibrated Confidence and Uncertainty Measurement [54.55643652781891]
  Conversational Question Answering (ConvQA) models aim at answering a question with its relevant paragraph and previous question-answer pairs that occurred during conversation multiple times. We propose to filter out inaccurate answers in the conversation history based on their estimated confidences and uncertainties from the ConvQA model. We validate our models, Answer Selection-based realistic Conversation Question Answering, on two standard ConvQA datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-10T09:42:07Z)

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.