Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 299

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Adaptive-RAG: Learning to Adapt Retrieval-Augmented Large Language Models through Question Complexity

Jeong, Soyeong, Baek, Jinheon, Cho, Sukmin, Hwang, Sung Ju, Park, Jong·2024·Proceedings of the 2024 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies (Volume 1: Long Papers)

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.18653/v1/2024.naacl-long.389

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Figure 1 QA performance (F1) and efficiency (Time/Query) for different retrieval-augmented generation approaches. We use the GPT-3.5-Turbo-Instruct as the base LLM.
Figure 1 QA performance (F1) and efficiency (Time/Query) for different retrieval-augmented generation approaches. We use the GPT-3.5-Turbo-Instruct as the base LLM.CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 2 A conceptual comparison of different retrieval-augmented LLM approaches to question answering. (A) In response to a query, this single-step approach retrieves relevant documents and then generates an answer. However, it may not be sufficient for complex queries that require multi-step reasoning. (B) This multi-step approach iteratively retrieves documents and generates intermediate answers, which is powerful yet largely inefficient for the simple query since it requires multiple accesses to both LLMs and retrievers. (C) Our adaptive approach can select the most suitable strategy for retrieval-augmented LLMs, ranging from iterative, to single, to even no retrieval approaches, based on the complexity of given queries determined by our classifier.
Figure 2 A conceptual comparison of different retrieval-augmented LLM approaches to question answering. (A) In response to a query, this single-step approach retrieves relevant documents and then generates an answer. However, it may not be sufficient for complex queries that require multi-step reasoning. (B) This multi-step approach iteratively retrieves documents and generates intermediate answers, which is powerful yet largely inefficient for the simple query since it requires multiple accesses to both LLMs and retrievers. (C) Our adaptive approach can select the most suitable strategy for retrieval-augmented LLMs, ranging from iterative, to single, to even no retrieval approaches, based on the complexity of given queries determined by our classifier.CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 3 Performance on QA and query-complexity assessment of different adaptive approaches for retrieval-augmented LLMs with FLAN-T5 XL (Left) and XXL (Center). For labeling the complexity of queries, we use the silver data annotated from the prediction outcomes of models (described in Section 3.2). We also provide the confusion matrix across three labels (Right).
Figure 3 Performance on QA and query-complexity assessment of different adaptive approaches for retrieval-augmented LLMs with FLAN-T5 XL (Left) and XXL (Center). For labeling the complexity of queries, we use the silver data annotated from the prediction outcomes of models (described in Section 3.2). We also provide the confusion matrix across three labels (Right).CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 4 QA performance (F1) and efficiency (Time/Query) for different retrieval-augmented generation approaches. We use the FLAN-T5-XL (3B) as the base LLM.
Figure 4 QA performance (F1) and efficiency (Time/Query) for different retrieval-augmented generation approaches. We use the FLAN-T5-XL (3B) as the base LLM.CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 5 QA performance (F1) and efficiency (Time/Query) for different retrieval-augmented generation approaches. We use the FLAN-T5-XXL (11B) as the base LLM.
Figure 5 QA performance (F1) and efficiency (Time/Query) for different retrieval-augmented generation approaches. We use the FLAN-T5-XXL (11B) as the base LLM.CC-BY · From the PDF

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 4 references

Research works printed but not linked: 42

  1. Rohan Anil, Andrew M. Dai, Orhan Firat, Melvin John- son, Dmitry Lepikhin, Alexandre Passos, Siamak Shakeri, Emanuel Taropa, Paige Bailey, Zhifeng Chen, Eric Chu, Jonathan H. Clark, Laurent El Shafey, Yanping Huang, Kathy Meier-Hellstern, Gau- rav Mishra, Erica Moreira, Mark Omernick, Kevin Robinson, Sebastian Ruder, Yi Tay, Kefan Xiao, Yuanzhong Xu, Yujing Zhang, Gustavo Hernández Ábrego, Junwhan Ahn, Jacob Austin, Paul Barham, Jan A. Botha, James Bradbury, Siddhartha Brahma, Kevin Brooks, Michele Catasta, Yong Cheng, Colin Cherry, Christopher A. Choquette-Choo, Aakanksha Chowdhery, Clément Crepy, Shachi Dave, Mostafa Dehghani, Sunipa Dev, Jacob Devlin, Mark Díaz, Nan Du, Ethan Dyer, Vladimir Feinberg, Fangxi- aoyu Feng, Vlad Fienber, Markus Freitag, Xavier Garcia, Sebastian Gehrmann, Lucas Gonzalez, and et al. 2023. Palm 2 technical report. arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.10403. · DOI · Paper page
  2. Akari Asai, Zeqiu Wu, Yizhong Wang, Avirup Sil, and Hannaneh Hajishirzi. 2024. Self-RAG: Learning to retrieve, generate, and critique through self-reflection. In The Twelfth International Conference on Learning Representations.
  3. Jinheon Baek, Soyeong Jeong, Minki Kang, Jong Park, and Sung Ju Hwang. 2023. Knowledge-augmented language model verification. In Proceedings of the 2023 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, EMNLP 2023, Singapore, De- cember 6-10, 2023, pages 1720-1736. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  4. Sebastian Borgeaud, Arthur Mensch, Jordan Hoffmann, Trevor Cai, Eliza Rutherford, Katie Millican, George van den Driessche, Jean-Baptiste Lespiau, Bogdan Damoc, Aidan Clark, Diego de Las Casas, Aurelia Guy, Jacob Menick, Roman Ring, Tom Hennigan, Saffron Huang, Loren Maggiore, Chris Jones, Albin Cassirer, Andy Brock, Michela Paganini, Geoffrey Irving, Oriol Vinyals, Simon Osindero, Karen Si- monyan, Jack W. Rae, Erich Elsen, and Laurent Sifre. 2022. Improving language models by retrieving from trillions of tokens. In International Conference on Machine Learning, ICML 2022, 17-23 July 2022, Bal- timore, Maryland, USA, volume 162 of Proceedings of Machine Learning Research, pages 2206-2240.
  5. PMLR.
  6. Tom B. Brown, Benjamin Mann, Nick Ryder, Melanie Subbiah, Jared Kaplan, Prafulla Dhariwal, Arvind Neelakantan, Pranav Shyam, Girish Sastry, Amanda Askell, Sandhini Agarwal, Ariel Herbert-Voss, Gretchen Krueger, Tom Henighan, Rewon Child, Aditya Ramesh, Daniel M. Ziegler, Jeffrey Wu, Clemens Winter, Christopher Hesse, Mark Chen, Eric Sigler, Mateusz Litwin, Scott Gray, Benjamin Chess, Jack Clark, Christopher Berner, Sam McCandlish, Alec Radford, Ilya Sutskever, and Dario Amodei. 2020. Language models are few-shot learners. In Ad- vances in Neural Information Processing Systems 33: Annual Conference on Neural Information Process- ing Systems 2020, NeurIPS 2020, December 6-12, 2020, virtual.
  7. Danqi Chen, Adam Fisch, Jason Weston, and Antoine Bordes. 2017. Reading wikipedia to answer open- domain questions. In Proceedings of the 55th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Lin- guistics, ACL 2017, Vancouver, Canada, July 30 - August 4, Volume 1: Long Papers, pages 1870-1879. Association for Computational Linguistics. · DOI · Paper page
  8. Sukmin Cho, Jeongyeon Seo, Soyeong Jeong, and Jong C. Park. 2023. Improving zero-shot reader by reducing distractions from irrelevant documents in open-domain question answering. In Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2023, Singapore, December 6-10, 2023, pages 3145- 3157. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  9. Xanh Ho, Anh-Khoa Duong Nguyen, Saku Sugawara, and Akiko Aizawa. 2020. Constructing A multi-hop QA dataset for comprehensive evaluation of reason- ing steps. In Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Computational Linguistics, COLING 2020, Barcelona, Spain (Online), December 8-13, 2020, pages 6609-6625. International Committee on Computational Linguistics. · DOI · Paper page
  10. Gautier Izacard and Edouard Grave. 2021. Leveraging passage retrieval with generative models for open do- main question answering. In Proceedings of the 16th Conference of the European Chapter of the Associ- ation for Computational Linguistics: Main Volume, EACL 2021, Online, April 19 -23, 2021, pages 874- 880. Association for Computational Linguistics. · DOI · Paper page
  11. Soyeong Jeong, Jinheon Baek, Sukmin Cho, Sung Ju Hwang, and Jong Park. 2023. Test-time self-adaptive small language models for question answering. In Findings of the Association for Computational Lin- guistics: EMNLP 2023, Singapore, December 6-10, 2023, pages 15459-15469. Association for Computa- tional Linguistics.
  12. Zhengbao Jiang, Frank F. Xu, Luyu Gao, Zhiqing Sun, Qian Liu, Jane Dwivedi-Yu, Yiming Yang, Jamie Callan, and Graham Neubig. 2023. Active retrieval augmented generation. In EMNLP 2023. · DOI · Paper page
  13. Mandar Joshi, Eunsol Choi, Daniel S. Weld, and Luke Zettlemoyer. 2017. Triviaqa: A large scale distantly supervised challenge dataset for reading comprehen- sion. In Proceedings of the 55th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, ACL 2017, Vancouver, Canada, July 30 -August 4, Volume 1: Long Papers, pages 1601-1611. Association for Computational Linguistics. · DOI · Paper page
  14. Vladimir Karpukhin, Barlas Oguz, Sewon Min, Patrick S. H. Lewis, Ledell Wu, Sergey Edunov, Danqi Chen, and Wen-tau Yih. 2020. Dense passage retrieval for open-domain question answering. In Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natu- ral Language Processing, EMNLP 2020, November 16-20, 2020. Association for Computational Linguis- tics. · DOI · Paper page
  15. Tushar Khot, Harsh Trivedi, Matthew Finlayson, Yao Fu, Kyle Richardson, Peter Clark, and Ashish Sab- harwal. 2023. Decomposed prompting: A modular approach for solving complex tasks. In The Eleventh International Conference on Learning Representa- tions, ICLR 2023, Kigali, Rwanda, May 1-5, 2023.
  16. Tom Kwiatkowski, Jennimaria Palomaki, Olivia Red- field, Michael Collins, Ankur Parikh, Chris Alberti, Danielle Epstein, Illia Polosukhin, Jacob Devlin, Ken- ton Lee, Kristina Toutanova, Llion Jones, Matthew Kelcey, Ming-Wei Chang, Andrew M. Dai, Jakob Uszkoreit, Quoc Le, and Slav Petrov. 2019. Natu- ral questions: A benchmark for question answering research. Transactions of the Association for Compu- tational Linguistics, 7:452-466. · DOI · Paper page
  17. Angeliki Lazaridou, Elena Gribovskaya, Wojciech Stokowiec, and Nikolai Grigorev. 2022. Internet- augmented language models through few-shot prompting for open-domain question answering. arXiv preprint arXiv:2203.05115. · DOI · Paper page
  18. Belinda Z. Li, Sewon Min, Srinivasan Iyer, Yashar Mehdad, and Wen-tau Yih. 2020. Efficient one-pass end-to-end entity linking for questions. In Proceed- ings of the 2020 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, EMNLP 2020, Online, November 16-20, 2020, pages 6433-6441. Associa- tion for Computational Linguistics. · DOI
  19. Ilya Loshchilov and Frank Hutter. 2019. Decoupled weight decay regularization. In 7th International Conference on Learning Representations, ICLR 2019, New Orleans, LA, USA, May 6-9, 2019. OpenRe- view.net.
  20. Alex Mallen, Akari Asai, Victor Zhong, Rajarshi Das, Daniel Khashabi, and Hannaneh Hajishirzi. 2023. When not to trust language models: Investigating effectiveness of parametric and non-parametric mem- ories. In Proceedings of the 61st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Vol- ume 1: Long Papers), ACL 2023, Toronto, Canada, July 9-14, 2023, pages 9802-9822. Association for Computational Linguistics. · DOI · Paper page
  21. OpenAI. 2023. GPT-4 technical report. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.08774. · DOI · Paper page
  22. Adam Paszke, Sam Gross, Francisco Massa, Adam Lerer, James Bradbury, Gregory Chanan, Trevor Killeen, Zeming Lin, Natalia Gimelshein, Luca Antiga, Alban Desmaison, Andreas Köpf, Edward Z. Yang, Zachary DeVito, Martin Raison, Alykhan Te- jani, Sasank Chilamkurthy, Benoit Steiner, Lu Fang, Junjie Bai, and Soumith Chintala. 2019. Pytorch: An imperative style, high-performance deep learning li- brary. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32: Annual Conference on Neural Informa- tion Processing Systems 2019, pages 8024-8035.
  23. Jayr Alencar Pereira, Robson do Nascimento Fidalgo, Roberto de Alencar Lotufo, and Rodrigo Frassetto Nogueira. 2023. Visconde: Multi-document QA with GPT-3 and neural reranking. In Advances in Informa- tion Retrieval -45th European Conference on Infor- mation Retrieval, ECIR 2023, Dublin, Ireland, April 2-6, 2023, Proceedings, Part II, volume 13981 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 534-543. Springer. · DOI
  24. Ofir Press, Muru Zhang, Sewon Min, Ludwig Schmidt, Noah A. Smith, and Mike Lewis. 2023. Measuring and narrowing the compositionality gap in language models. In Findings of the Association for Computa- tional Linguistics: EMNLP 2023. · DOI · Paper page
  25. Peng Qi, Haejun Lee, Tg Sido, and Christopher D. Man- ning. 2021. Answering open-domain questions of varying reasoning steps from text. In Proceedings of the 2021 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, EMNLP 2021, Vir- tual Event / Punta Cana, Dominican Republic, 7-11 November, 2021, pages 3599-3614. Association for Computational Linguistics. · DOI
  26. Pranav Rajpurkar, Jian Zhang, Konstantin Lopyrev, and Percy Liang. 2016. Squad: 100, 000+ questions for machine comprehension of text. In Proceedings of the 2016 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, EMNLP 2016, Austin, Texas, USA, November 1-4, 2016, pages 2383-2392. The Association for Computational Linguistics. · DOI · Paper page
  27. Ori Ram, Yoav Levine, Itay Dalmedigos, Dor Muhlgay, Amnon Shashua, Kevin Leyton-Brown, and Yoav Shoham. 2023. In-context retrieval-augmented lan- guage models. Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics.
  28. Stephen E. Robertson, Steve Walker, Susan Jones, Micheline Hancock-Beaulieu, and Mike Gatford. 1994. Okapi at TREC-3. In Proceedings of The Third Text REtrieval Conference, TREC 1994, Gaithers- burg, Maryland, USA, November 2-4, 1994, volume 500-225 of NIST Special Publication, pages 109- 126. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST).
  29. Weijia Shi, Sewon Min, Michihiro Yasunaga, Min- joon Seo, Rich James, Mike Lewis, Luke Zettle- moyer, and Wen-tau Yih. 2023. REPLUG: retrieval- augmented black-box language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2301.12652. · DOI · Paper page
  30. Hugo Touvron, Louis Martin, Kevin Stone, Peter Al- bert, Amjad Almahairi, Yasmine Babaei, Nikolay Bashlykov, Soumya Batra, Prajjwal Bhargava, Shruti Bhosale, Dan Bikel, Lukas Blecher, Cristian Canton- Ferrer, Moya Chen, Guillem Cucurull, David Esiobu, Jude Fernandes, Jeremy Fu, Wenyin Fu, Brian Fuller, Cynthia Gao, Vedanuj Goswami, Naman Goyal, An- thony Hartshorn, Saghar Hosseini, Rui Hou, Hakan Inan, Marcin Kardas, Viktor Kerkez, Madian Khabsa, Isabel Kloumann, Artem Korenev, Punit Singh Koura, Marie-Anne Lachaux, Thibaut Lavril, Jenya Lee, Di- ana Liskovich, Yinghai Lu, Yuning Mao, Xavier Mar- tinet, Todor Mihaylov, Pushkar Mishra, Igor Moly- bog, Yixin Nie, Andrew Poulton, Jeremy Reizen- stein, Rashi Rungta, Kalyan Saladi, Alan Schelten, Ruan Silva, Eric Michael Smith, Ranjan Subrama- nian, Xiaoqing Ellen Tan, Binh Tang, Ross Tay- lor, Adina Williams, Jian Xiang Kuan, Puxin Xu, Zheng Yan, Iliyan Zarov, Yuchen Zhang, Angela Fan, Melanie Kambadur, Sharan Narang, Aurélien Ro- driguez, Robert Stojnic, Sergey Edunov, and Thomas Scialom. 2023. Llama 2: Open foundation and fine- tuned chat models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.09288. · DOI · Paper page
  31. Harsh Trivedi, Niranjan Balasubramanian, Tushar Khot, and Ashish Sabharwal. 2022a. Musique: Multi- hop questions via single-hop question composition. Trans. Assoc. Comput. Linguistics, 10:539-554. · DOI · Paper page
  32. Harsh Trivedi, Niranjan Balasubramanian, Tushar Khot, and Ashish Sabharwal. 2022b. ♪ MuSiQue: Multi- hop questions via single-hop question composition. Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics, 10:539-554. · DOI · Paper page
  33. Harsh Trivedi, Niranjan Balasubramanian, Tushar Khot, and Ashish Sabharwal. 2023. Interleaving retrieval with chain-of-thought reasoning for knowledge- intensive multi-step questions. In Proceedings of the 61st Annual Meeting of the Association for Com- putational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers), ACL 2023, Toronto, Canada, July 9-14, 2023, pages 10014-10037. Association for Computational Lin- guistics. · DOI · Paper page
  34. Jason Wei, Yi Tay, Rishi Bommasani, Colin Raffel, Barret Zoph, Sebastian Borgeaud, Dani Yogatama, Maarten Bosma, Denny Zhou, Donald Metzler, Ed H. Chi, Tatsunori Hashimoto, Oriol Vinyals, Percy Liang, Jeff Dean, and William Fedus. 2022a. Emer- gent abilities of large language models. Trans. Mach. Learn. Res., 2022.
  35. Jason Wei, Xuezhi Wang, Dale Schuurmans, Maarten Bosma, Brian Ichter, Fei Xia, Ed H. Chi, Quoc V. Le, and Denny Zhou. 2022b. Chain-of-thought prompt- ing elicits reasoning in large language models. In NeurIPS.
  36. Thomas Wolf, Lysandre Debut, Victor Sanh, Julien Chaumond, Clement Delangue, Anthony Moi, Pier- ric Cistac, Tim Rault, Rémi Louf, Morgan Funtowicz, Joe Davison, Sam Shleifer, Patrick von Platen, Clara Ma, Yacine Jernite, Julien Plu, Canwen Xu, Teven Le Scao, Sylvain Gugger, Mariama Drame, Quentin Lhoest, and Alexander M. Rush. 2020. Transform- ers: State-of-the-art natural language processing. In Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing: System Demonstrations, EMNLP 2020 -Demos, pages 38- 45. Association for Computational Linguistics. · DOI · Paper page
  37. Lee Xiong, Chenyan Xiong, Ye Li, Kwok-Fung Tang, Jialin Liu, Paul N. Bennett, Junaid Ahmed, and Arnold Overwijk. 2021. Approximate nearest neigh- bor negative contrastive learning for dense text re- trieval. In 9th International Conference on Learning Representations, ICLR 2021, Virtual Event, Austria, May 3-7, 2021. OpenReview.net.
  38. Wei Yang, Yuqing Xie, Aileen Lin, Xingyu Li, Luchen Tan, Kun Xiong, Ming Li, and Jimmy Lin. 2019. End-to-end open-domain question answering with bertserini. In Proceedings of the 2019 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, NAACL-HLT 2019, Minneapolis, MN, USA, June 2-7, 2019, Demonstrations, pages 72-77. Association for Computational Linguistics. · DOI
  39. Zhilin Yang, Peng Qi, Saizheng Zhang, Yoshua Bengio, William Cohen, Ruslan Salakhutdinov, and Christo- pher D. Manning. 2018. HotpotQA: A dataset for diverse, explainable multi-hop question answering. In Proceedings of the 2018 Conference on Empiri- cal Methods in Natural Language Processing, pages 2369-2380, Brussels, Belgium. Association for Com- putational Linguistics. · DOI · Paper page
  40. Shunyu Yao, Jeffrey Zhao, Dian Yu, Nan Du, Izhak Shafran, Karthik R. Narasimhan, and Yuan Cao. 2023. React: Synergizing reasoning and acting in language models. In The Eleventh International Conference on Learning Representations, ICLR 2023, Kigali, Rwanda, May 1-5, 2023. OpenReview.net.
  41. Xinran Zhao, Hongming Zhang, Xiaoman Pan, Wen- lin Yao, Dong Yu, and Jianshu Chen. 2023. Thrust: Adaptively propels large language models with exter- nal knowledge. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 36: Annual Conference on Neu- ral Information Processing Systems 2023, NeurIPS 2023, New Orleans, LA, USA, December 10 -16, 2023.
  42. Fengbin Zhu, Wenqiang Lei, Chao Wang, Jianming Zheng, Soujanya Poria, and Tat-Seng Chua. 2021. Retrieving and reading: A comprehensive survey on open-domain question answering. arXiv preprint arXiv:2101.00774. · arXiv

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Jeong, S., Baek, J., Cho, S., Hwang, S. J., & Park, J.
Venue
Proceedings of the 2024 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies (Volume 1: Long Papers)
Published
2024
Pages
7036-7050
Cited by
299
References
4

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.