Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 2605.26663

Evidence Absence Is Not Evidence Insufficiency: Diagnosing NEI Construction Artifacts in Fact Verification

Abstract

Evidence absence is not evidence insufficiency, but fact verification benchmarks can make them observationally similar. The Not Enough Information (NEI) label is often operationalized through constructed evidence conditions, and that choice silently determines what a verifier learns. We introduce NEI-CAP, a construction-aware diagnostic protocol for insufficient-evidence evaluation. Each NEI example carries the construction family that produced it; NEI-CAP audits shortcut cues, validates hard cases through human adjudication, and tests whether competence transfers across constructions. We instantiate the protocol on SciFact, with FEVER and HoVer as bounded external controls. Across these settings, NEI competence does not transfer reliably: encoder verifiers and an instruction-tuned decoder trained on shortcut-prone constructions fail to recognize semantically related insufficient evidence, and mixed-construction training narrows but does not close the gap. Fixed-claim diagnostics further show that the evidence condition shifts confidence in the reference Support/Refute label, not only NEI recall, so an aggregate NEI score can hide which problem a model has actually solved. We therefore recommend reporting the construction family alongside the score, and distill the results into a checklist for benchmarks that carry an insufficient-evidence label.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Jingxi Qiu, Zeyu Han, Cheng Huang. 2026-08-30. Evidence Absence Is Not Evidence Insufficiency: Diagnosing NEI Construction Artifacts in Fact Verification. https://arxiv.org/abs/2605.26663

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 papers

Learning to Evaluate Before Improving: Automatic Rubric Induction for Automatic Research Agents

Autonomous scientific research agents are increasingly applied to end-to-end scientific workflows, including literature review, data analysis, experimentation, and report generation. However, open-ended research tasks often do not clearly specify the analyses, methods, and success criteria required to complete the task. As a result, agents may miss important analyses, use inappropriate methods, or draw conclusions that are insufficiently supported by evidence. To address the problem, we present AutoSciRub, an evaluation-first framework that induces a task-specific executable rubric before research execution, and uses it to guide execution, criterion-level verification as well as iterative revision. AutoSciRub decomposes an underspecified instruction into atomic scientific goals, grounds them in relevant literature and task-visible data, and synthesizes specific, actionable, and verifiable criteria. The resulting rubric makes implicit experimental and evidential requirements explicit, providing guidance for experiments and analyses. During revision, rubric-guided verification identifies unmet criteria and enables targeted refinement of the research report and its supporting artifacts. On ResearchClawBench, AutoSciRub consistently improves all tested configurations, with an average gain of 2.08 points across three backbone LLMs under the fixed Codex harness and 2.95 points across three agent harnesses using a fixed DeepSeek-V4-Flash backbone. On a randomly sampled 20-task subset of AstaBench E2E Discovery, AutoSciRub further achieves an average improvement of 16.8 points across three agent harnesses, while maintaining or increasing the number of successfully completed tasks. These results demonstrate that evaluation-first guidance provides an effective and generalizable control mechanism for autonomous scientific research (Code: https://github.com/zjunlp/AutoSciRub).

cs.CL

LLM-based Hardware Development with Hierarchical IRs and End-to-End Multi-Agent Workflow

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used in software development, but their use in complex hardware design remains limited. This gap stems from both the scarcity of public hardware training data and the fundamentally different methodologies used in hardware design. In particular, applying LLMs to hardware requires more than direct RTL generation: the model must understand module boundaries, inter-module connections, and verification requirements. In this paper, we present an LLM-based hardware development framework with hierarchical intermediate representations (IRs) and an end-to-end multi-agent workflow. The core idea is to provide an abstraction of hardware design to LLMs through two structured IRs: Architectural Sketch, which captures module topology and interconnection, and Operational Specification, which defines per-module functionality and interfaces. Our framework uses these IRs to decompose a complex design into sub-modules, specify the per-block functionality, and derive how each module should be tested and verified. We incorporate a multi-agent debug loop in the framework, allowing agents to get the error feedback and control the debug details such as the signals to be probed for simulation. We evaluate our framework on Verilog-Eval benchmark, achieving a pass@5 rate of 95.5%, which surpasses current state-of-the-art LLM generation frameworks. To better assess performance on complex, realistic designs, we introduce a new case study spanning applications from general-purpose processors to digital signal processing systems. Experimental results indicate that such complex designs exceed the capabilities of existing approaches, whereas our framework is the only one capable of producing functional end-to-end design. Our generated RTL follows all industry-standard design rules, is lint-clean, functionally correct and fully synthesizable.

cs.AR

Database-Augmented RAG for Automated Repair of REST API Misuses

Many Internet of Things (IoT) services provide Representational State Transfer (REST) APIs, which require client developers to implement applications that conform to the corresponding API specifications. When client programs contain API misuse, developers debug them based on error responses. However, such responses are often insufficient for identifying the root cause, requiring developers to repeatedly communicate with the server. Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) is a promising approach for providing large language models (LLMs) with external knowledge. However, in automated repair of REST API misuses, it remains unclear how specifications should be stored in a RAG database. This study evaluates how different configurations for organizing API specifications affect RAG-based repair of REST API misuse. We constructed 11 RAG configurations with different database structures and compared their repair rates with a baseline method. For evaluation, we used REST API misuse cases collected from real-world repositories. The results show that, in the studied datasets, the baseline method achieved a repair rate of 54.3%, whereas a RAG-based method using four databases achieved a maximum repair rate of 88.6%. These results indicate that organizing specifications according to version and content type can be an effective design choice for RAG-based REST API misuse repair.

cs.IR