Cited by 7Topic ModelingInformation Retrieval and Search BehaviorMultimodal Machine Learning Applications

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

Hierarchical Retrieval with Evidence Curation for Open-Domain Financial Question Answering on Standardized Documents

Open access
Choe, Jaeyoung, Kim, Jihoon, Jung, Woohwan·2025·Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL 2025

Abstract

Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) based large language models (LLMs) are widely used in finance for their excellent performance on knowledge-intensive tasks.However, standardized documents (e.g., SEC filing) share similar formats such as repetitive boilerplate texts, and similar table structures.This similarity forces traditional RAG methods to misidentify near-duplicate text, leading to duplicate retrieval that undermines accuracy and completeness.To address these issues, we propose the Hierarchical Retrieval with Evidence Curation (HiREC) framework.Our approach first performs hierarchical retrieval to reduce confusion among similar texts.It first retrieve related documents and then selects the most relevant passages from the documents.The evidence curation process removes irrelevant passages.When necessary, it automatically generates complementary queries to collect missing information.To evaluate our approach, we construct and release a Large-scale Open-domain Financial (LOFin) question answering benchmark that includes 145,897 SEC documents and 1,595 question-answer pairs.Our code and data are available at https://github.com/ deep-over/LOFin-bench-HiREC.

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/v1/2025.findings-acl.855

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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

Metadata

Authors
Choe, J., Kim, J., & Jung, W.
Affiliations
Hanyang University (KR)
Venue
Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL 2025
Published
2025
Pages
16663-16681
OpenAlex
W4412888134
Cited by
7
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 3
FWCI
4.89
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL (Findings of ACL) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
  • Ministry of Science and ICT, South Korea (IITP-2024-RS-2024-00423071)
  • Institute for Information and Communications Technology Promotion (RS-2023-00261068)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Information Retrieval and Search Behavior
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Multimodal Machine Learning Applications
Keywords
open-domain question answering, financial question answering, retrieval-augmented generation, hierarchical retrieval, SEC filings, passage selection, query generation

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