Large Language Models (LLMs) encapsulate a surprising amount of factual world knowledge. However, their performance on temporal questions and historical knowledge is limited because they often cannot understand temporal scope and orientation or neglect the temporal aspect altogether. In this study, we aim to measure precisely how robust LLMs are for question answering based on their ability to process temporal information and perform tasks requiring temporal reasoning and temporal factual knowledge. Specifically, we design eight time-sensitive robustness tests for factual information to check the sensitivity of six popular LLMs in the zero-shot setting. Overall, we find LLMs lacking temporal robustness, especially to temporal reformulations and the use of different granularities of temporal references. We show how a selection of these eight tests can be used automatically to judge a model's temporal robustness for user questions on the fly. Finally, we apply the findings of this study to improve the temporal QA performance by up to 55 percent.

Temporal awareness is crucial in many information retrieval tasks, particularly in scenarios where the relevance of documents depends on their alignment with the query's temporal context. Traditional retrieval methods such as BM25 and Dense Passage Retrieval (DPR) excel at capturing lexical and semantic relevance but fall short in addressing time-sensitive queries. To bridge this gap, we introduce the temporal retrieval model that integrates explicit temporal signals by incorporating query timestamps and document dates into the representation space. Our approach ensures that retrieved passages are not only topically relevant but also temporally aligned with user intent. We evaluate our approach on two large-scale benchmark datasets, ArchivalQA and ChroniclingAmericaQA, achieving substantial performance gains over standard retrieval baselines. In particular, our model improves Top-1 retrieval accuracy by 6.63% and NDCG@10 by 3.79% on ArchivalQA, while yielding a 9.56% boost in Top-1 retrieval accuracy and 4.68% in NDCG@10 on ChroniclingAmericaQA. Additionally, we introduce a time-sensitive negative sampling strategy, which refines the model's ability to distinguish between temporally relevant and irrelevant documents during training. Our findings highlight the importance of explicitly modeling time in retrieval systems and set a new standard for handling temporally grounded queries.

The success of deep reinforcement learning (DRL) relies on the availability and quality of training data, often requiring extensive interactions with specific environments. In many real-world scenarios, where data collection is costly and risky, offline reinforcement learning (RL) offers a solution by utilizing data collected by domain experts and searching for a batch-constrained optimal policy. This approach is further augmented by incorporating external data sources, expanding the range and diversity of data collection possibilities. However, existing offline RL methods often struggle with challenges posed by non-matching data from these external sources. In this work, we specifically address the problem of source-target domain mismatch in scenarios involving mixed datasets, characterized by a predominance of source data generated from random or suboptimal policies and a limited amount of target data generated from higher-quality policies. To tackle this problem, we introduce Transition Scoring (TS), a novel method that assigns scores to transitions based on their similarity to the target domain, and propose Curriculum Learning-Based Trajectory Valuation (CLTV), which effectively leverages these transition scores to identify and prioritize high-quality trajectories through a curriculum learning approach. Our extensive experiments across various offline RL methods and MuJoCo environments, complemented by rigorous theoretical analysis, demonstrate that CLTV enhances the overall performance and transferability of policies learned by offline RL algorithms.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown strong promise as rerankers, especially in ``listwise'' settings where an LLM is prompted to rerank several search results at once. However, this ``cascading'' retrieve-and-rerank approach is limited by the bounded recall problem: relevant documents not retrieved initially are permanently excluded from the final ranking. Adaptive retrieval techniques address this problem, but do not work with listwise rerankers because they assume a document's score is computed independently from other documents. In this paper, we propose an adaptation of an existing adaptive retrieval method that supports the listwise setting and helps guide the retrieval process itself (thereby overcoming the bounded recall problem for LLM rerankers). Specifically, our proposed algorithm merges results both from the initial ranking and feedback documents provided by the most relevant documents seen up to that point. Through extensive experiments across diverse LLM rerankers, first stage retrievers, and feedback sources, we demonstrate that our method can improve nDCG@10 by up to 13.23% and recall by 28.02%--all while keeping the total number of LLM inferences constant and overheads due to the adaptive process minimal. The work opens the door to leveraging LLM-based search in settings where the initial pool of results is limited, e.g., by legacy systems, or by the cost of deploying a semantic first-stage.

Retrieving relevant context is a common approach to reduce hallucinations and enhance answer reliability. Explicitly citing source documents allows users to verify generated responses and increases trust. Prior work largely evaluates citation correctness - whether cited documents support the corresponding statements. But citation correctness alone is insufficient. To establish trust in attributed answers, we must examine both citation correctness and citation faithfulness. In this work, we first disentangle the notions of citation correctness and faithfulness, which have been applied inconsistently in previous studies. Faithfulness ensures that the model's reliance on cited documents is genuine, reflecting actual reference use rather than superficial alignment with prior beliefs, which we call post-rationalization. We design an experiment that reveals the prevalent issue of post-rationalization, which undermines reliable attribution and may result in misplaced trust. Our findings suggest that current attributed answers often lack citation faithfulness (up to 57 percent of the citations), highlighting the need to evaluate correctness and faithfulness for trustworthy attribution in language models.

With the rapid advancement of neural language models, the deployment of over-parameterized models has surged, increasing the need for interpretable explanations comprehensible to human inspectors. Existing post-hoc interpretability methods, which often focus on unigram features of single input textual instances, fail to capture the models' decision-making process fully. Additionally, many methods do not differentiate between decisions based on spurious correlations and those based on a holistic understanding of the input. Our paper introduces DISCO, a novel method for discovering global, rule-based explanations by identifying causal n-gram associations with model predictions. This method employs a scalable sequence mining technique to extract relevant text spans from training data, associate them with model predictions, and conduct causality checks to distill robust rules that elucidate model behavior. These rules expose potential overfitting and provide insights into misleading feature combinations. We validate DISCO through extensive testing, demonstrating its superiority over existing methods in offering comprehensive insights into complex model behaviors. Our approach successfully identifies all shortcuts manually introduced into the training data (100% detection rate on the MultiRC dataset), resulting in an 18.8% regression in model performance -- a capability unmatched by any other method. Furthermore, DISCO supports interactive explanations, enabling human inspectors to distinguish spurious causes in the rule-based output. This alleviates the burden of abundant instance-wise explanations and helps assess the model's risk when encountering out-of-distribution (OOD) data.

Answering reasoning-based complex questions over text and hybrid sources, including tables, is a challenging task. Recent advances in large language models (LLMs) have enabled in-context learning (ICL), allowing LLMs to acquire proficiency in a specific task using only a few demonstration samples (exemplars). A critical challenge in ICL is the selection of optimal exemplars, which can be either task-specific (static) or test-example-specific (dynamic). Static exemplars provide faster inference times and increased robustness across a distribution of test examples. In this paper, we propose an algorithm for static exemplar subset selection for complex reasoning tasks. We introduce EXPLORA, a novel exploration method designed to estimate the parameters of the scoring function, which evaluates exemplar subsets without incorporating confidence information. EXPLORA significantly reduces the number of LLM calls to ~11% of those required by state-of-the-art methods and achieves a substantial performance improvement of 12.24%. We open-source our code and data (https://github.com/kiranpurohit/EXPLORA).

Local feature selection in machine learning provides instance-specific explanations by focusing on the most relevant features for each prediction, enhancing the interpretability of complex models. However, such methods tend to produce misleading explanations by encoding additional information in their selections. In this work, we attribute the problem of misleading selections by formalizing the concepts of label and feature leakage. We rigorously derive the necessary and sufficient conditions under which we can guarantee no leakage, and show existing methods do not meet these conditions. Furthermore, we propose the first local feature selection method that is proven to have no leakage called SUWR. Our experimental results indicate that SUWR is less prone to overfitting and combines state-of-the-art predictive performance with high feature-selection sparsity. Our generic and easily extendable formal approach provides a strong theoretical basis for future work on interpretability with reliable explanations.

Open-domain complex Question Answering (QA) is a difficult task with challenges in evidence retrieval and reasoning. The complexity of such questions could stem from questions being compositional, hybrid evidence, or ambiguity in questions. While retrieval performance for classical QA tasks is well explored, their capabilities for heterogeneous complex retrieval tasks, especially in an open-domain setting, and the impact on downstream QA performance, are relatively unexplored. To address this, in this work, we propose a benchmark composing diverse complex QA tasks and provide a toolkit to evaluate state-of-the-art pre-trained dense and sparse retrieval models in an open-domain setting. We observe that late interaction models and surprisingly lexical models like BM25 perform well compared to other pre-trained dense retrieval models. In addition, since context-based reasoning is critical for solving complex QA tasks, we also evaluate the reasoning capabilities of LLMs and the impact of retrieval performance on their reasoning capabilities. Through experiments, we observe that much progress is to be made in retrieval for complex QA to improve downstream QA performance. Our software and related data can be accessed at https://github.com/VenkteshV/DEXTER

An important problem in text-ranking systems is handling the hard queries that form the tail end of the query distribution. The difficulty may arise due to the presence of uncommon, underspecified, or incomplete queries. In this work, we improve the ranking performance of hard or difficult queries without compromising the performance of other queries. Firstly, we do LLM based query enrichment for training queries using relevant documents. Next, a specialized ranker is fine-tuned only on the enriched hard queries instead of the original queries. We combine the relevance scores from the specialized ranker and the base ranker, along with a query performance score estimated for each query. Our approach departs from existing methods that usually employ a single ranker for all queries, which is biased towards easy queries, which form the majority of the query distribution. In our extensive experiments on the DL-Hard dataset, we find that a principled query performance based scoring method using base and specialized ranker offers a significant improvement of up to 25% on the passage ranking task and up to 48.4% on the document ranking task when compared to the baseline performance of using original queries, even outperforming SOTA model.