Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) systems rely on retrieved documents being concatenated into a model's input context, making both document ordering and context size critical yet controversial design choices. Prior work reports position-based effects such as lost in the middle and related long-context phenomena. However, empirical findings remain inconsistent and hard to reproduce across models, datasets, and evaluation protocols. In this paper, we present a systematic reproducibility study that revisits these claims and examines how they evolve with contemporary LLMs under a controlled evaluation framework. We first show that topic sampling is a major source of variance: small topic sets can mask or exaggerate ordering effects. Based on repeated subset sampling across multiple topic budgets, we provide a practical calibration procedure that identifies topic counts yielding stable trends at feasible cost. Using these fixed topic sets, we then reproduce and extend results on position sensitivity, re-evaluating lost in the middle and positional biases in modern LLMs. Then, we also study a more realistic RAG scenario in which relevance is mediated by a retriever rather than oracle access to ground-truth documents. In this setting, we re-examine a recent industry study and identify discrepancies to evaluation choices such as limited topic coverage and reliance on LLM-based judges. Finally, we conduct an analysis of how retrieval order and context size affect downstream LLM performance under imperfect retrieval. Our results demonstrate that both factors interact strongly with retrieval quality and model choice, and that conclusions drawn from idealised setups do not always transfer to real-world RAG pipelines. We release all code and configurations to support reproducibility and future work on robust RAG evaluation.
Multilingual fact verification requires evidence that is both relevant and sufficiently complete for reliable factuality prediction. However, existing systems often rely on search snippets, sentence-level evidence, or locally segmented passages, which can miss decisive context and produce fragmented evidence. To overcome these limitations, we propose SEEK, a Semantic Evidence Extraction with an adaptive chunKing framework that constructs coherent evidence chunks from full fact-checking articles by identifying semantic topic transitions and preserving local verification context. The constructed chunks are encoded using a multilingual encoder and then multilingual LLMs are finetuned using LoRA adapter for veracity prediction. Experiments on X-FACT and RU22Fact show that SEEK improves macro-f1 by up to 10% over semantic chunking, 19% over sentence chunking, and 20% over search-snippet baselines. Evidence completeness and significance analyses further show that SEEK preserves richer verification context and enables more reliable multilingual fact-checking.
Fine-tuning a pretrained language model on a curated dataset can produce spurious correlations between the fine-tuning task and unintended latent factors -- such as misaligned personas or political slant -- that the curation procedure has entangled with the task. The model can latch onto these spurious correlations, leading to bias and reduced out-of-distribution generalisation. We prove that under reasonable assumptions on task complexity and the spurious correlation, such latent factors can be identified, without supervision, from the weights of a naive LoRA fine-tune. Existing approaches to removing bias, such as activation steering, remove identified factors from residual-stream activations, either at inference or during training. We argue, however, that the goal should be to remove the spurious correlation, not the latent factor itself, as the pretrained model may rely on it for genuine task signal. To enable this, we propose GRASP, GRadient projection of Associated Spurious Patterns, which prevents the model from acquiring new reliance on the identified latent factor while preserving any pretrained content along it. We validate on three fine-tuning tasks. The first two involve emergent misalignment, where fine-tuning on a narrow task -- in our case, writing insecure code and giving bad medical advice -- leads to misaligned responses on unrelated topics. Here our method completely removes misalignment in the insecure code case and reduces them by ~5x in the bad medical advice case, beating all baselines in the trade-off between misalignment-reduction and task-preservation. The last is a novel political-bias experiment, where fine-tuning on right-skewed Reddit financial-advice data causes political-lean drift on unrelated topics. Here our method reduces drift by more than half, while improving financial task performance, beating all baselines.
The rapid growth of scientific publishing has made it increasingly difficult to track how fast-moving areas evolve. Search engines and LLM-based assistants retrieve or summarize papers, but often hide how the corpus was selected, organized, or connected to temporal patterns. We present $\texttt{Eliot}$, a publicly deployed interactive system for traceable exploration of evolving scientific literature. Motivated by two studies on Large Language Models (LLMs) and Automated Planning and Scheduling (APS), $\texttt{Eliot}$ generalizes literature-evolution analysis beyond hand-built taxonomies and domain-specific scripts. Given explicit query terms and filters, it retrieves arXiv papers at query time, represents each paper by title and abstract, clusters the corpus into themes, assigns representative keywords, and visualizes each cluster's publication-year distribution. We evaluate $\texttt{Eliot}$ as both an applied system and an interactive research aid. An offline configuration study across eight arXiv domains compares document representations, dimensionality reduction methods, and clustering algorithms using intrinsic clustering and topic-coherence metrics; the results support MiniLM embeddings with 10-dimensional UMAP and Agglomerative Clustering as a practical default. A scenario-based survey and expert focus group assess interpretability and use contexts: participants rated cluster labels as meaningful in 85% of scenario responses, and feedback indicated that $\texttt{Eliot}$ is most valuable for auditable overviews of rapidly changing technical areas. These results suggest that query-time clustering and temporal inspection can complement search and generation tools by helping researchers inspect and refine the evidence behind literature trends.
Crisis Responders (CRs) rapidly assess thousands of youth SMS conversations each year to identify mental health concerns and guide support. Yet youth distress is increasingly expressed through evolving and context-specific language that often does not fit fixed-label taxonomies. This work analyzed 703,975 de-identified Kids Help Phone conversations (2018-2023) and expanded KHP's 19-label issue taxonomy into a 39-label hierarchical schema. We then introduce Keyphrase Generative Representation (KGR), a constrained LLM generating concise, conversation-specific keyphrases, evaluated across 129 conversations and 387 expert annotations. The expanded taxonomy achieved expert consensus reliability, with an accuracy of 0.96, and expert review found that 81% of keyphrases accurately reflected content and 74% improved clarity. KGR surfaced identity-linked themes absent from the fixed taxonomy, including immigration problems and caregiver burden, and supported a topic-retrieval workflow that increased accuracy from 0.25 to 0.70 (+0.45) over the manual analyst process. KGR marks a shift toward hybrid, interpretable generative representations that extend crisis response beyond static taxonomies to surface emerging and culturally grounded patterns of youth distress.
Understanding how events evolve over time is essential for search engines handling queries about trending news. We present QDET (Query-Driven Event Timeline Summarization), a production system deployed on Baidu Search that constructs focused event timelines to explain specific query events. Unlike traditional topic-centric approaches that aim for comprehensive coverage, QDET identifies and organizes sub-events closely relevant to the query from noisy candidate sets formed by millions of documents retrieved daily. QDET incorporates two key innovations: (1) multi-task supervised fine-tuning with three auxiliary tasks-temporal ordering, causal judgment, and timeline completion-that enable compact models to match the performance of much larger general-purpose models in specialized domains; (2) reinforcement learning-based event concise summarization that enforces strict length constraints while maintaining semantic quality, achieving 88.2% length compliance and outperforming 671B-scale models by 7.7 points in constraint satisfaction. Our fine-tuned 7B parameter model achieves 76.2% F1 score on timeline summarization, slightly surpassing the zero-shot performance of DeepSeek-R1-671B (76.1% F1) while using only 1% of its parameters-demonstrating that domain-specific optimization enables production-ready models with comparable quality at drastically reduced computational costs. Online A/B tests on Baidu Search validate real-world effectiveness, showing 5.5% CTR improvement, 4.6% longer dwell time, and 4.4% deeper exploration compared to single-task baselines. We further demonstrate that timeline understanding transfers to heat prediction, confirming effective knowledge transfer to downstream tasks.
This paper presents a multilingual customer service self-help corpus comprising 1,122 manually validated documents in Finnish, Danish, Norwegian, and Swedish, totaling over one million tokens. The documents have been sourced from the public self-help pages of four Nordic telecommunications operators and subsequently filtered for person-identifiable information and relevance through a combined LLM and human annotation pipeline. Domain-specific datasets for Nordic languages remain scarce, particularly in customer service: a domain of growing importance for retrieval-augmented generation, cross-lingual transfer learning, and emerging agent-based service architectures. An analysis of the corpus reveals substantial variation in document length and structure across operators, reflecting distinct editorial strategies, as well as broad topical coverage spanning network hardware, mobile services, TV and streaming, billing, and account management. The dataset is publicly available under a CC-BY-NC-SA-4.0 license at https://zenodo.org/records/19493152, intended to support reproducible research in Nordic NLP and information retrieval.
Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) has become critical for knowledge-intensive applications, yet evaluating its performance in vertical domains remains difficult due to domain complexity, diverse context scales, and heavy reliance on expert assessments that are costly, inconsistent, and non-scalable. We introduce FAB-Bench, an end-to-end framework for adaptive benchmarking of RAG systems in semiconductor manufacturing. FAB-Bench defines six diagnostic metrics measuring factual accuracy, contextual utilization, completeness, retrieval relevance, technical depth, and reasoning consistency. The framework couples retriever diagnostics with generator-level reasoning analysis across context windows of 4K-32K tokens, quantifying how retrieval precision and generative fidelity co-evolve as contextual scope expands. From over 1,300 generated candidates, we curated a high-quality benchmark of 200 query-answer pairs spanning three synthesis strategies: needle-in-haystack, intra-document multi-topic, and cross-document multi-hop. Systematic evaluation across four LLMs and four RAG frameworks reveals three distinct context-scaling behaviors: logarithmic growth, early saturation, and cold-start dynamics, and identifies attention dilution as the primary mechanism behind performance degradation at extreme context lengths. Cross-framework validation on three additional production RAG systems confirms evaluation portability.
Evidence construction--the stage that determines which passages reach the language model before generation begins--is evaluated paradigm by paradigm, leaving practitioners with no principled way to diagnose which organization strategy fails, where, or why. We introduce AuthTrace, a diagnostic benchmark built on thematically dense single-author corpora where near-miss distractors share style, topic, and vocabulary with the required evidence. AuthTrace provides explicit quoted evidence, exact fan-in annotation, and a unified pack-level protocol measuring evidence recall, evidence precision, and answer correctness. A fan-in gradient--the number of source documents required to support the answer--serves as the primary diagnostic axis, enabling controlled comparison across retrieval, memory, graph, and structured-evidence paradigms. Evaluating eight systems across two QA models, we find that evidence recall is the strongest observed predictor of answer correctness under the primary reader-judge pair (r = 0.96); most failures stem from missing evidence rather than answer synthesis. Fan-in further exposes paradigm-specific collapse patterns: flat retrieval degrades 2-3x faster than thematically organized evidence construction. These results show fan-in decomposition to be a reusable diagnostic lens for identifying where evidence-construction systems fail and which paradigm best serves a given workload.
Existing financial NLP benchmarks often rely on labels supplied by outside observers, measuring how language is perceived rather than what speakers have committed to in the market. We introduce StakeBench, an evaluation framework for language understanding grounded in market commitment. StakeBench links 560,876 comments from 2,261 resolved markets to verified position, action, and market-odds records across Polymarket and Manifold. Supervision is derived from observable market behavior. Position sides, post-comment trading actions, and market-odds trajectories replace human annotation. Four diagnostic tasks test whether models detect market commitment, identify the revealed side, anticipate future action, and perform collective odds projection. Three commitment-aware metrics measure alignment with revealed preferences rather than perceived sentiment. Validity audits and explicit interpretation boundaries help distinguish observable commitment signals from latent belief and causal market-odds impact. Across 15 LLMs and 18 topics and platform settings, models partially recover position-side signals, with Directed Accuracy from 0.506 to 0.599, but show structural failures on later tasks. Ten of the fifteen models collapse to one or two action labels in future action anticipation, and no model consistently improves on the naive odds-direction baseline in collective odds projection. Model scale is not correlated with performance, finance-domain tuning does not improve revealed-side identification, and platform incentives strongly shape higher-order results. StakeBench is packaged with evaluation code and dataset under CC-BY 4.0.