The Answer Path and the Grounding Instruction in LLM Question Answering over Knowledge Graphs
1mês
- Publicado
- Coletado
Autores
Arquimedes Canedo
Categorias
A graph retrieval-augmented generation pipeline chooses which triples to put in the prompt, a syntax to write them in, an order to write them in, and a sentence telling the model what to do with them. We vary all four over six large language models and two knowledge-graph question answering benchmarks. Two of the four choices move the answer and the other two are flat. The first is whether the answer path, the triples needed to reach the answer, is in the prompt at all. Holding the number of triples fixed and replacing every triple that is not on the chain with material from an unrelated entity changes answer accuracy by +0.003 F1, while removing the chain costs most of what the graph was worth. Retrieval budget belongs on recall, and precision in the range we can test buys nothing. There is no retriever here: subgraphs come from gold SPARQL, so precision describes the context we build, not a system setting. The second is the grounding instruction. With no facts in the prompt, telling a model to answer using only the provided facts drops F1 from 0.299 to 0.035, a factor of 8.63. That figure describes an evaluation with an empty context arm rather than a working pipeline, and an experiment that applies the instruction to its context arm but not to its no-context baseline manufactures a spurious finding that graph context hurts at depth. We found one in our own results and retract it. Syntax, triple order and subgraph size produce no effect we can measure at multi-hop depth. The comparison that would price the grounding instruction against correct context is not measurable with a format-sensitive scorer, because the instruction determines the response format; we report it as an open contrast rather than a number.
O overfeed.news indexa e aponta. Publicamos um trecho curto — o artigo completo fica em arXiv AI Papers.
Mais de arXiv AI Papers
Entre para seguir esta fonte
Retriever-Free Retrieval: Navigating Documents with Decision Models
While language models have become dramatically more capable, retrieval still largely relies on lexical matching or similarity in fixed embedding spaces. This creates a capability asymmetry: what the retriever fails to find, even the strongest generator cannot recover. We propose DecisionRAG, which brings the capabilities of pretrained language models to retrieval using decision models that jointly evaluate candidate branches in a single forward pass, without generating any tokens, and show that judging candidates in a shared context makes their relevance estimates comparable. Like a person browsing a library, DecisionRAG navigates the corpus's inherent structure from broad topics down to individual passages, deciding at each level which branches are worth exploring. Without task-specific training or a first-stage retriever, DecisionRAG outperforms dense retrieval with an 8B reranker by 13.8 R@1 points on MultiDoc2Dial and 17.4 Hit@1 points on Natural Questions. Across four benchmarks, including a corpus of 2.68 million Wikipedia paragraphs, retrieval takes just 0.7-1.8 seconds per query.
Auto-Research Arena: Benchmarking and Advancing Auto-Research in Language Modeling
As autonomous research systems become more capable, benchmarks must both evaluate their performance and support meaningful research progress. We introduce Auto-Research Arena, a multi-target benchmark for evaluating autonomous research systems and discovering ideas in language modeling. Arena supports diverse research objectives within a shared experimental environment by separating admissibility from improvement: model quality and resource constraints determine whether a result qualifies, while the selected target measures progress among admissible results. We instantiate Arena in language model pretraining with nine targets spanning model, data, training, and inference efficiency, and evaluate seven research harnesses using two foundation models. Arena clearly differentiates existing harnesses across research objectives, with several sophisticated methods outperformed by our simple sequential search baseline, indicating substantial headroom in current auto-research systems. Beyond evaluation, Arena reveals a substantially broader frontier of model and system ideas aligned with active research directions. Reusing these discoveries in a new quality-driven search yields lower training loss under matched data and FLOPs and lower held-out BPB at the same model size. Together, Arena provides a common framework for benchmarking autonomous research and expanding its scope in language modeling. The code is available at https://github.com/Auto-Research-Arena/auto-research-arena
Center-of-Mass Interpretation of Evolution Strategies
Evolution strategies (ES) update a model by sampling a population of perturbed copies, scoring each one, and moving in the reward-weighted direction of the perturbations. This update is usually presented as an estimate of a smoothed gradient. We present a geometrical interpretation of this update instead. Treat each perturbed model as a particle and its reward as the particle's mass. Before scoring, every particle has the same mass and the population balances at its centroid. Once rewards are assigned, it balances at its reward-weighted center of mass instead. We show that the mean-subtracted ES update is exactly this displacement, scaled by a scalar factor that depends on the mean reward, for any finite population. The physical reading needs nonnegative rewards, which can always be arranged by adding a constant to every reward without changing the update. In the limit of a large population or under antithetic sampling, the centroid sits on the model itself, so ES has an even simpler geometric interpretation: from its current location, the model moves towards the reward-weighted center of mass of its own population. The same picture explains what subtracting the mean reward does: it changes the point from which the displacement is measured, from the model to the sampled centroid. Our contribution is an intuitive, geometric way to visualize an ES update, exact for any finite population.
Learning Force-Reactive Humanoid Loco-Manipulation
Many everyday tasks require controlling contact force as well as motion. On a humanoid, this force must often be coordinated across both hands and the whole body, and cannot be specified by kinematic trajectories alone. Therefore, we present FLORE, a framework for learning force-reactive humanoid loco-manipulation. We collect robot-free demonstrations using two force-sensing UMI-style handheld grippers for hand motion and contact wrenches, and wearable trackers for body motion. A force-reactive diffusion policy takes vision, proprioception, and measured wrenches as input, then predicts actions and per-hand force commands. A hybrid compliance whole-body controller with force tracking executes these commands while maintaining balance: an integral of the force error measured by real force/torque (F/T) sensors lets each hand track force accurately along the commanded direction and remain compliant along the others. In simulation, the controller tracks per-hand force commands of varied magnitude and direction, with little loss in whole-body motion accuracy. Across three contact-rich tasks on the robot, the force-reactive policy succeeds in 80% of rollouts, compared with 26.7% for a position-only policy trained on the same demonstrations and executed by the same controller. For more details, please visit our website: https://louis-leee.github.io/FLoRe/.