首页 > AI前沿 > Learning Evidence Sufficiency Boundaries for Selective Answering in Grounded Multi-Hop QA

Learning Evidence Sufficiency Boundaries for Selective Answering in Grounded Multi-Hop QA

arXiv自然语言 2026-09-03 12:00 2 阅读 查看原文

Computer Science > Computation and Language

arXiv:2609.01687 (cs)

Title:Learning Evidence Sufficiency Boundaries for Selective Answering in Grounded Multi-Hop QA

View PDF HTML (experimental)
Abstract:Grounded question answering systems should answer only when the supplied evidence supports the answer. In multi-hop QA, this requirement is difficult because partial evidence can make an unsupported answer appear plausible. We study selective answering through evidence sufficiency boundaries: for the same question, a model should abstain under unsupported or partially supported context, answer when the context first becomes sufficient, and keep the answer stable when redundant evidence is added. We introduce Evidence Sufficiency Boundary Training, a generation-native training framework that constructs ordered evidence chains and supervises the abstain-to-answer transition directly. The method combines level supervision, a boundary flip margin, post-boundary stability, and answer recall protection. We build evidence chains from HotpotQA, 2WikiMultiHopQA, and MuSiQue, then evaluate models with chain metrics, raw QA utility, and unsupported-answer rates on external non-answerable sets. With Qwen2.5-3B-Instruct and LoRA adaptation, Evidence Sufficiency Boundary Training gives the strongest boundary localization among the tested systems, with flip accuracy of 0.807 compared with 0.781 for a token-level abstention baseline. It also achieves the lowest overall unsupported-answer rate on external non-answerable evaluation, 0.095 compared with 0.101 for the same baseline, while retaining competitive raw QA F1. The results show that grounded selective answering improves when training marks the evidence level where refusal should give way to answering.
Subjects: Computation and Language (cs.CL)
Cite as: arXiv:2609.01687 [cs.CL]
  (or arXiv:2609.01687v1 [cs.CL] for this version)
  https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.01687

Submission history

From: Haruto Sato [view email]
[v1] Tue, 1 Sep 2026 15:16:11 UTC (1,301 KB)
Full-text links:

Access Paper:

  • View PDF
  • HTML (experimental)
  • TeX Source

Current browse context:

cs.CL
< prev   |   next >
Change to browse by:
cs

References & Citations

Bookmark

BibSonomy Reddit

Bibliographic and Citation Tools

Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?)
Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?)
Litmaps (What is Litmaps?)
scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?)

Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article

alphaXiv (What is alphaXiv?)
CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers (What is CatalyzeX?)
DagsHub (What is DagsHub?)
Gotit.pub (What is GotitPub?)
Hugging Face (What is Huggingface?)
ScienceCast (What is ScienceCast?)

Demos

Replicate (What is Replicate?)
Hugging Face Spaces (What is Spaces?)
TXYZ.AI (What is TXYZ.AI?)

Recommenders and Search Tools

Influence Flower (What are Influence Flowers?)
CORE Recommender (What is CORE?)

arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.