Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 2511.18931

Look It Up: Analysing Internal Web Search Capabilities of Modern LLMs

Abstract

Modern large language models increasingly integrate internal web-based retrieval to provide real-time answers, yet it remains unclear how effectively these systems identify information need, trigger retrieval, and use retrieved evidence. To understand these parameters better, we evaluate the necessity and effectiveness of internal web search through an external lens in closed-source LLMs, without access to model parameters or internal configuration. Our evaluation method comprises a static split of 783 temporally anchored factual queries answerable from pre-cutoff knowledge, designed to test whether retrieval is invoked based on factual uncertainty, and a dynamic split of 288 post-cutoff queries that require up-to-date information, designed to evaluate retrieval effectiveness under unavoidable information need. We experiment across four models across two model families and scales. Across models, enabling retrieval yields substantial accuracy gains on the static split, but systematically degrades confidence calibration. On the dynamic split, models frequently invoke retrieval yet remain below 70 percent accuracy, with failures dominated by query formulation and source selection errors rather than integration of retrieved content. While retrieval is inexpensive to invoke and can be selectively beneficial, repeated retrieval attempts rarely recover from early failures, and confidence becomes inflated once retrieval is available. Overall, internal web-based retrieval functions effectively as a low-latency verification mechanism, but falls short as a reliable IR pipeline, highlighting the need for improved retrieval triggering, query formulation, and evidence-aware confidence calibration in web-enabled LLMs.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Sahil Kale. 2026-08-28. Look It Up: Analysing Internal Web Search Capabilities of Modern LLMs. https://arxiv.org/abs/2511.18931

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

Discover connections

Connections use source metadata and explicit phrase matches, not verified experimental comparisons.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related discoveries

When Robots Mishear Us: Mapping the Safety Risks of Voice-Controlled Embodied AI

We investigate whether automatic speech recognition (ASR) errors in user input can lead to unsafe outputs from Embodied AI (EAI) models. We find that ASR errors can lead to harmful instructions being accepted and executed by EAI models, thereby reducing safety. We simulate ASR errors and combine them with existing safety benchmarks (SafeAgentBench and POEX) to evaluate how different errors affect embodied AI safety. We find that some of them preserve semantic structure but increase harmful ambiguity, while others weaken the model refusal behaviour and allow unsafe plans to be generated and executed. We show that in some cases automatic correction of ASR errors can reduce the risk, but this is not always effective. Overall, we show that ASR errors lead to significant safety risks for embodied AI.

cs.AI

Sleight of Word Benchmark: Can Language Models Notice If Their Own Output Was Tampered With?

The output of a Language Model can be tampered with \emph{while} the model is writing it. A simple test can thus be constructed by evaluating the model's perception of this external perturbation. In this spirit, a simple benchmark is built in which a single word is consistently substituted with another in the generation process. We call this method \emph{Sleight of Word}. Two distinct axes are measured: metrics that relate to the model's surprise, as well as an evaluation of the textual reaction for 19 different open-weight language models.

cs.CL

TCS-BENCH: Benchmarking State-of-the-Art Generative AI Theoretical Computer Science Research Ability

We introduce TCS-Bench, a benchmark for evaluating Large Language Models (LLMs) on research-level Theoretical Computer Science (TCS) proof generation. TCS-Bench consists of theorem-proving tasks from papers published at top theoretical computer science venues (STOC, FOCS, and SODA). Each task provides the necessary context to derive a self-contained proof for a target result. We evaluate state-of-the-art models on this benchmark. We verify the correctness of generated proofs via a verification agent, and further benchmark the verifier against human-expert proof judgements on a set of target statements and generated proofs pairs. Our reference verifier achieves over 90% accuracy on the expert labeled set.

cs.CL