DS@GT ARC at LongEval: Citation Integrity and Factual Grounding in Scientific QA
DS@GT ARC evaluates the effectiveness of Corrective RAG (CRAG) and CiteFix in improving citation faithfulness and answer grounding in Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) QA systems, revealing a trade-off between relevance and citation integrity.
Proposes the need for metrics that reward strict answer grounding in RAG QA systems
Keywords
Before reading this…
Applications
- →Information Retrieval
- →Question Answering Systems
To understand this paper, make sure you know these concepts first:
- Understanding of Natural Language Processing (NLP)find papers →
- Familiarity with Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG)find papers →
Abstract
More Like ThisThis paper describes DS@GT ARC's submission to the CLEF 2026 LongEval Task 4 on Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG). In this submission, we examine a divergence between traditional natural language evaluation metrics and citation integrity as applied to RAG QA systems. We evaluate a corrective pipeline using Corrective RAG (CRAG) and CiteFix against baseline and frontier model benchmark RAG QA scores. While frontier models maximized answer relevance and fluency scores, our RAGAs LLM-as-judge diagnostics indicate that frontier models would correctly identify relevant documents without using their context in answer generation. Conversely, by filtering chunks pre-generation and enforcing strict entailment of generated claims to the cited material post-generation, our corrective pipeline marginally improved citation faithfulness and answer grounding. We propose that evaluation of trustworthy RAG QA requires metrics that reward strict answer grounding.