Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) has emerged as a promising approach for knowledge-intensive tasks. However, few studies have examined RAG for Taiwanese Historical Archives. In this paper, we present an initial study of a RAG pipeline applied to two historical Traditional Chinese datasets, Fort Zeelandia and the Taiwan Provincial Council Gazette, along with their corresponding open-ended query sets. We systematically investigate the effects of query characteristics and metadata integration strategies on retrieval quality, answer generation, and the performance of the overall system. The results show that early-stage metadata integration enhances both retrieval and answer accuracy while also revealing persistent challenges for RAG systems, including hallucinations during generation and difficulties in handling temporal or multi-hop historical queries.

A well-known issue with Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG) is that retrieved passages that are irrelevant to the query sometimes distract the answer-generating LLM, causing it to provide an incorrect response. In this paper, we shed light on this core issue and formulate the distracting effect of a passage w.r.t. a query (and an LLM). We provide a quantifiable measure of the distracting effect of a passage and demonstrate its robustness across LLMs. Our research introduces novel methods for identifying and using hard distracting passages to improve RAG systems. By fine-tuning LLMs with these carefully selected distracting passages, we achieve up to a 7.5% increase in answering accuracy compared to counterparts fine-tuned on conventional RAG datasets. Our contribution is two-fold: first, we move beyond the simple binary classification of irrelevant passages as either completely unrelated vs. distracting, and second, we develop and analyze multiple methods for finding hard distracting passages. To our knowledge, no other research has provided such a comprehensive framework for identifying and utilizing hard distracting passages.

Traditional Information Retrieval (IR) metrics, such as nDCG, MAP, and MRR, assume that human users sequentially examine documents with diminishing attention to lower ranks. This assumption breaks down in Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG) systems, where search results are consumed by Large Language Models (LLMs), which, unlike humans, process all retrieved documents as a whole rather than sequentially. Additionally, traditional IR metrics do not account for related but irrelevant documents that actively degrade generation quality, rather than merely being ignored. Due to these two major misalignments, namely human vs. machine position discount and human relevance vs. machine utility, classical IR metrics do not accurately predict RAG performance. We introduce a utility-based annotation schema that quantifies both the positive contribution of relevant passages and the negative impact of distracting ones. Building on this foundation, we propose UDCG (Utility and Distraction-aware Cumulative Gain), a metric using an LLM-oriented positional discount to directly optimize the correlation with the end-to-end answer accuracy. Experiments on five datasets and six LLMs demonstrate that UDCG improves correlation by up to 36% compared to traditional metrics. Our work provides a critical step toward aligning IR evaluation with LLM consumers and enables more reliable assessment of RAG components

Retrieval Augmented Generation enhances LLM accuracy by adding passages retrieved from an external corpus to the LLM prompt. This paper investigates how positional bias - the tendency of LLMs to weight information differently based on its position in the prompt - affects not only the LLM's capability to capitalize on relevant passages, but also its susceptibility to distracting passages. Through extensive experiments on three benchmarks, we show how state-of-the-art retrieval pipelines, while attempting to retrieve relevant passages, systematically bring highly distracting ones to the top ranks, with over 60% of queries containing at least one highly distracting passage among the top-10 retrieved passages. As a result, the impact of the LLM positional bias, which in controlled settings is often reported as very prominent by related works, is actually marginal in real scenarios since both relevant and distracting passages are, in turn, penalized. Indeed, our findings reveal that sophisticated strategies that attempt to rearrange the passages based on LLM positional preferences do not perform better than random shuffling.

Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG) is an important aspect of conversing with Large Language Models (LLMs) when factually correct information is important. LLMs may provide answers that appear correct, but could contain hallucinated information. Thus, building benchmarks that can evaluate LLMs on multi-turn RAG conversations has become an increasingly important task. Simulating real-world conversations is vital for producing high quality evaluation benchmarks. We present RAGAPHENE, a chat-based annotation platform that enables annotators to simulate real-world conversations for benchmarking and evaluating LLMs. RAGAPHENE has been successfully used by approximately 40 annotators to build thousands of real-world conversations.

Large Language Model (LLM) based listwise ranking has shown superior performance in many passage ranking tasks. With the development of Large Reasoning Models, many studies have demonstrated that step-by-step reasoning during test-time helps improve listwise ranking performance. However, due to the scarcity of reasoning-intensive training data, existing rerankers perform poorly in many complex ranking scenarios and the ranking ability of reasoning-intensive rerankers remains largely underdeveloped. In this paper, we first propose an automated reasoning-intensive training data synthesis framework, which sources training queries and passages from diverse domains and applies DeepSeek-R1 to generate high-quality training labels. A self-consistency data filtering mechanism is designed to ensure the data quality. To empower the listwise reranker with strong reasoning ability, we further propose a two-stage post-training approach, which includes a cold-start supervised fine-tuning (SFT) stage for reasoning pattern learning and a reinforcement learning (RL) stage for further ranking ability enhancement. During the RL stage, based on the nature of listwise ranking, we design a multi-view ranking reward, which is more effective than a ranking metric-based reward. Extensive experiments demonstrate that our trained reasoning-intensive reranker \textbf{ReasonRank} outperforms existing baselines significantly and also achieves much lower latency than pointwise reranker Rank1. \textbf{Through further experiments, our ReasonRank has achieved state-of-the-art (SOTA) performance 40.6 on the BRIGHT leaderboard\footnote{https://brightbenchmark.github.io/}.} Our codes are available at https://github.com/8421BCD/ReasonRank.

Patient cohort retrieval is a pivotal task in medical research and clinical practice, enabling the identification of specific patient groups from extensive electronic health records (EHRs). In this work, we address the challenge of cohort retrieval in the echocardiography domain by applying Dense Passage Retrieval (DPR), a prominent methodology in semantic search. We propose a systematic approach to transform an echocardiographic EHR dataset of unstructured nature into a Query-Passage dataset, framing the problem as a Cohort Retrieval task. Additionally, we design and implement evaluation metrics inspired by real-world clinical scenarios to rigorously test the models across diverse retrieval tasks. Furthermore, we present a custom-trained DPR embedding model that demonstrates superior performance compared to traditional and off-the-shelf SOTA methods.To our knowledge, this is the first work to apply DPR for patient cohort retrieval in the echocardiography domain, establishing a framework that can be adapted to other medical domains.

We present GaRAGe, a large RAG benchmark with human-curated long-form answers and annotations of each grounding passage, allowing a fine-grained evaluation of whether LLMs can identify relevant grounding when generating RAG answers. Our benchmark contains 2366 questions of diverse complexity, dynamism, and topics, and includes over 35K annotated passages retrieved from both private document sets and the Web, to reflect real-world RAG use cases. This makes it an ideal test bed to evaluate an LLM's ability to identify only the relevant information necessary to compose a response, or provide a deflective response when there is insufficient information. Evaluations of multiple state-of-the-art LLMs on GaRAGe show that the models tend to over-summarise rather than (a) ground their answers strictly on the annotated relevant passages (reaching at most a Relevance-Aware Factuality Score of 60%), or (b) deflect when no relevant grounding is available (reaching at most 31% true positive rate in deflections). The F1 in attribution to relevant sources is at most 58.9%, and we show that performance is particularly reduced when answering time-sensitive questions and when having to draw knowledge from sparser private grounding sources.