CoverSynth: Coverage-Guided Generation of Retrieval Evaluation Sets

Anahita Sharma; Apaar Shanker; Rishav Chakravarti; Sneha Srinivasan; Vijay Kalmath; Dylan Wilbur; Yuan Li; Sara Bolouki; Yuan Xue

arXiv · 2610.15409

CoverSynth: Coverage-Guided Generation of Retrieval Evaluation Sets

Anahita Sharma·Apaar Shanker·Rishav Chakravarti·Sneha Srinivasan·Vijay Kalmath·Dylan Wilbur·Yuan Li·Sara Bolouki·Yuan Xue

View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Enterprise agents need retrieval evaluation sets that expose domain-specific failures and guide developers towards efficient deployment tradeoffs. Neither expert-human-authored sets nor current synthetic generation methods provide a methodology for achieving the necessary coverage, reliability, efficiency, and discriminability required for such decision-making. Simultaneously, the field does not have an assessment framework for determining when an evaluation set has satisfied these properties. We introduce an evaluation set assessment framework for these criteria and CoverSynth -- a generator specifically designed to satisfy these criteria without incurring the high cost of human expert labeling. Starting from an unannotated corpus, CoverSynth targets coverage across retrieval demands and system capabilities. Deterministic checks locate evidence quotes in their sources, while model-based checks assess semantic validity to guarantee reliable ground truth. Across five public enterprise-style corpora, our method provides informative variation in difficulty, revealing unseen failure modes such as an inability of agents to handle underspecified or ambiguous requests. On the RepLiQA corpus, 91\% of human-generated queries can be answered by all members on a panel of 12 retrieval systems, compared to only 12\% of CoverSynth-generated queries. Finally, in a repeated TechQA/RepLiQA study, 12 of 12 within-harness model contrasts have positive nominal 95\% intervals on generated sets, compared with 4 of 12 on human sets. CoverSynth makes coverage and evidence quality explicit construction objectives, producing corpus-grounded evaluations that reveal retrieval headroom and differences between agent configurations.

Explore related subjects

cs.AI

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

Anahita Sharma, Apaar Shanker, Rishav Chakravarti, Sneha Srinivasan, Vijay Kalmath, Dylan Wilbur, Yuan Li, Sara Bolouki, Yuan Xue. 2026-10-11. CoverSynth: Coverage-Guided Generation of Retrieval Evaluation Sets. https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.15409

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

SEDM: Selective Self-Evolving Distributed Memory for Agents

Agents in a society can reuse each other's experience, but indiscriminate memory use increases processing cost and can reduce task success. We present SEDM (Selective Self-Evolving Distributed Memory), a framework that selects both what agents share and when recipients use it. On the sender side, SEDM admits memories through paired execution tests, ranks them by relevance and measured utility, and abstracts them for cross-domain reuse. On the recipient side, Calibrated Memory Gating (CMG) predicts success with and without memory in a single forward pass, learning from paired outcomes including ties. It injects memory only when the calibrated success gain outweighs a context-cost penalty. SEDM exceeds the strongest evaluated baseline on LoCoMo open-domain questions by 15.1 F1 points and outperforms G-Memory on FEVER and HotpotQA with 16-32% fewer prompt tokens. In a controlled HotpotQA study, CMG achieves success comparable to always using memory with 18% fewer agent input tokens. Within the full SEDM pipeline on LoCoMo, CMG outperforms both always-use and no-memory policies for two SEDM memories while using 19-31% fewer input tokens than always-use. These results show that selective use can recover value from shared memories that hurt performance when injected indiscriminately.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2026

Toward Agents That Reason About Their Computation

While reinforcement learning agents can achieve superhuman performance in many complex tasks, they typically do not become more computationally efficient as they improve. In contrast, humans gradually require less cognitive effort as they become more proficient at a task. If agents could reason about their compute as they learn, could they similarly reduce their computation footprint? If they could, we could have more energy efficient agents or free up compute cycles for other processes like planning. In this paper, we experiment with showing agents the cost of their computation and giving them the ability to control when they use compute. We conduct our experiments on the Arcade Learning Environment, and our results demonstrate that with the same training compute budget, agents that reason about their compute perform better on 75% of games. Furthermore, these agents use three times less compute on average. We analyze individual games and show where agents gain these efficiencies. An interactive version of this paper is available at https://adrianorenstein.com/paper/toward-compute.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2026

LingLanMedBench: A Unified Benchmark for Evaluating Large Language Models in Traditional Chinese Medicine

Reliable evaluation of large language models in traditional Chinese medicine remains limited because existing benchmarks mainly focus on examination-style question answering or isolated generative tasks. We developed LingLanMedBench, a unified benchmark comprising 25,620 expert-verified items across 13 subtasks and five domains, covering knowledge, language understanding, information extraction, and diagnostic-therapeutic decision-making. LingLanMedBench standardizes task formats and evaluation metrics and further incorporates synonym-tolerant clinical-label matching, empirically derived hard subsets, and decision-recognition reformulations of open-ended clinical tasks. Fourteen open-source and proprietary models were evaluated under a standardized zero-shot protocol. Performance varied substantially across domains, model families, task formulations, and difficulty levels. The leading overall score decreased from 51.1 on the full benchmark to 31.9 on the hard subsets. Prescription performance also differed markedly between open-ended generation, with F1 scores of 32.7 and 20.3, and decision recognition, with accuracies of 90.6 and 56.8 on the full and hard subsets, respectively. These findings reveal a substantial gap between knowledge-oriented performance and clinically faithful reasoning. LingLanMedBench provides a standardized and reproducible framework for characterizing current capabilities, identifying systematic limitations, and tracking meaningful progress in large language models for traditional Chinese medicine.

cs.AI↗