Search arXiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2508.01696

CoCoA: Collaborative Chain-of-Agents for Parametric-Retrieved Knowledge Synergy

Yi Jiang·Sendong Zhao·Jianbo Li·Haochun Wang·Lizhe Zhang·Yan Liu·Bing Qin
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) enhances Large Language Models (LLMs), especially for knowledge-intensive tasks. Despite its advantages, current RAG methods often struggle to fully exploit knowledge during generation. In particular, the synergy between the model's internal parametric knowledge and external retrieved knowledge remains limited. Retrieved contents may sometimes mislead generation, while certain generated content can guide the model toward more accurate outputs. In this work, we propose Collaborative Chain-of-Agents, a framework designed to enhance explicitly synergy over both parametric and retrieved knowledge. Specifically, we first introduce CoCoA-zero, a multi-agent RAG framework that first performs conditional knowledge induction and then reasons answers. Building on this, we develop CoCoA, a long-chain training strategy that synthesizes extended multi-agent reasoning trajectories from CoCoA-zero to fine-tune the LLM. This strategy enhances the model's capability to explicitly integrate and jointly leverage parametric and retrieved knowledge. Experimental results demonstrate the superiority of CoCoA in open-domain QA and multi-hop QA.

Explore related subjects

cs.CLcs.AI

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Yi Jiang, Sendong Zhao, Jianbo Li, Haochun Wang, Lizhe Zhang, Yan Liu, Bing Qin. 2025-10-09. CoCoA: Collaborative Chain-of-Agents for Parametric-Retrieved Knowledge Synergy. https://arxiv.org/abs/2508.01696

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

SafetyFlow: An Agent-Flow System for Automated LLM Safety Benchmarking

The rapid proliferation of large language models (LLMs) has intensified the requirement for reliable safety evaluation to uncover model vulnerabilities. To this end, numerous LLM safety evaluation benchmarks are proposed. However, existing benchmarks generally rely on labor-intensive manual curation, which causes excessive time and resource consumption. They also exhibit significant redundancy and limited difficulty. To alleviate these problems, we introduce SafetyFlow, the first agent-flow system designed to automate the construction of LLM safety benchmarks. SafetyFlow can automatically build a comprehensive safety benchmark in only four days without any human intervention by orchestrating seven specialized agents, significantly reducing time and resource cost. Equipped with versatile tools, the agents of SafetyFlow ensure process and cost controllability while integrating human expertise into the automatic pipeline. The final constructed dataset, SafetyFlowBench, contains 23,446 queries with low redundancy and strong discriminative power. Our contribution includes the first fully automated benchmarking pipeline and a comprehensive safety benchmark. We evaluate the safety of 49 advanced LLMs on our dataset and conduct extensive experiments to validate our efficacy and efficiency.

cs.CL↗
arXiv2026

Geometric Uncertainty for Detecting and Correcting Hallucinations in LLMs

Large language models are known to hallucinate, generating linguistically plausible but incorrect answers to questions. Uncertainty quantification has been proposed as a strategy to detect such behaviour, but existing methods lack a unified framework to assess reliability at both the prompt and answer level. We introduce a geometric framework which quantifies language model uncertainty at both levels by explicitly modelling a prompt-conditioned semantic distribution in answer embedding space. Our approach is black-box and sampling-based; we generate multiple answers per prompt, and use archetypal analysis to estimate a geometric support for the answer distribution. At the prompt level, we approximate the distribution entropy to quantify uncertainty; for each individual answer, we then use notions of atypicality to assess its reliability relative to the batch. We employ our framework to not only detect hallucinations but correct them, by selecting the batch example deemed most reliable. Experiments show that our framework performs comparably to or better than prior methods on short form question-answering datasets, and achieves superior results on medical datasets where hallucinations carry particularly critical risks. Beyond pure performance, we suggest the theoretical grounding of our work provides support for semantic distributions as useful objects of study for language model uncertainty.

cs.CL↗
arXiv2026

Calibrated Confidence Expression for Radiology Report Generation

Safe deployment of Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs) in radiology report generation requires not only accurate predictions but also clinically interpretable indicators of when outputs should be thoroughly reviewed, enabling selective radiologist verification and reducing the risk of hallucinated findings influencing clinical decisions. One intuitive approach to this is verbalized confidence, where the model explicitly states its certainty. However, current state-of-the-art language models are often overconfident, and research on calibration in multimodal settings such as radiology report generation is limited. To address this gap, we introduce ConRad (Confidence Calibration for Radiology Reports), a reinforcement learning framework for fine-tuning medical LVLMs to produce calibrated verbalized confidence estimates alongside radiology reports. We study two settings: a single report-level confidence score and a sentence-level variant assigning a confidence to each claim. Both are trained using the GRPO algorithm with reward functions based on the logarithmic scoring rule, which incentivizes truthful self-assessment by penalizing miscalibration and guarantees optimal calibration under reward maximization. Experimentally, ConRad substantially improves calibration and outperforms competing methods. In a clinical evaluation we show that ConRad's report level scores are well aligned with clinicians' judgment. By highlighting full reports or low-confidence statements for targeted review, ConRad can support safer clinical integration of AI-assistance for report generation.

cs.CL↗