DeepWeaver is a novel framework that weaves noisy retrieved evidence into comprehensive answers by maintaining Thought Block Chains (TBCs), a structured representation that groups claims, salient information, keywords, and supporting evidence.
Abstract
Retrieve-then-generate pipelines are commonly used to produce deep-research answers for open-ended questions, but retrieval alone is insufficient: LLMs must organize noisy and fragmented evidence into comprehensive, well-cited answers. We refer to this process as evidence synthesis. However, direct generation often underuses evidence, misaligns citations, and collapses diverse information into shallow summaries, exposing an evidence synthesis gap between retrieval and generation. Thus, we propose DeepWeaver, a novel framework that weaves noisy retrieved evidence into comprehensive answers by maintaining Thought Block Chains (TBCs), a structured representation that groups claims, salient information, keywords, and supporting evidence. DeepWeaver uses subordinate TBCs to inspect residual evidence, commit TBC revisions, and discover new claims before final generation. We evaluate DeepWeaver on open-ended QA over both knowledge bases and the web, and introduce LoQA, a high-density benchmark for evidence synthesis. Across multiple LLMs, DeepWeaver improves content sufficiency, citation grounding, and detail preservation on LoQA, while achieving deeper insights and higher citation quality on DeepResearch Bench. These results show that evidence weaving is an effective mechanism for bridging retrieval and generation in open-ended QA. Our code is available at https://github.com/KlozeWang/DeepWeaver.
HiEviDR-Bench is introduced, a benchmark for evaluating Hierarchical Evidence Aggregation in Deep Research and a traceability-oriented evaluation framework with five dimensions: report quality, evidence traceability, citation accuracy, claim verification, and answer correctness, together with a progressive gating mecha...
Yu-Bo Sun, Chunyi Peng, Yu-Kun Yan et al.· arXiv.org· 0 citations
The thesis argues that truthful technical search requires explicit mechanisms for claim-level grounding, calibrated abstention, contradiction handling, and support-aware evidence presentation, and which architectures and optimization strategies enable reliable real-world deployment.
Juan Luis Filgueiras· Annual International ACM SIG...· 0 citations
Scientific ideation is driven by curiosity: researchers ask questions that expose knowledge gaps, reveal competing hypotheses, and clarify missing evidence relevant to decision making. Yet, most LLM-based ideation systems optimize the idea text while leaving curiosity under-modeled, resulting in brittle, engine-specifi...
Sikun Guo, Di Wang, Xiaohan Fan et al.· Proceedings of the 32nd ACM...· 0 citations
ResearchQA is introduced, a benchmark of 6,211 single-paper question-answer pairs from 494 open-access papers spanning eight domains and four question types: lookup, comprehension, multi-hop, and adversarial, designed for citation-grounded evaluation.
By evaluating paper retrieval, evidence grounding, and answer accuracy separately, LitTraceQA provides a testbed for scientific QA systems that produce verifiable answers rather than unsupported summaries.
A systematic analysis of existing evaluation frameworks and metrics for RAG-based Question Answering (QA) systems reveals urgent needs for hybrid evaluation frameworks, reasoning path traceability, combined pipeline assessment, and harmlessness evaluation, laying groundwork for the next generation of evaluation methodo...