# What External Knowledge is Preferred by LLMs? Characterizing and Exploring Chain of Evidence in Imperfect Context for Multi-Hop QA

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2412.12632 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.12632/

## Key facts

- Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 23 of its 35 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 17 Dec 2024.

## Builds on (most cited first, 23 of 23)

- [GPT-4 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.08774/) (2023)
- [LLaMA: Open and Efficient Foundation Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.13971/) (2023)
- [Llama 2: Open Foundation and Fine-Tuned Chat Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.09288/) (2023)
- [HotpotQA: A Dataset for Diverse, Explainable Multi-hop Question Answering](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1809.09600/) (2018)
- [Self-RAG: Learning to Retrieve, Generate, and Critique through Self-Reflection](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.11511/) (2023)
- [Constructing A Multi-hop QA Dataset for Comprehensive Evaluation of Reasoning Steps](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2011.01060/) (2020)
- [Retrieval-Augmented Generation for AI-Generated Content: A Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.19473/) (2024)
- [Adaptive Chameleon or Stubborn Sloth: Revealing the Behavior of Large Language Models in Knowledge Conflicts](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.13300/) (2023)
- [Knowledge Conflicts for LLMs: A Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.08319/) (2024)
- [MultiHop-RAG: Benchmarking Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Multi-Hop Queries](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.15391/) (2024)
- [RealTime QA: What's the Answer Right Now?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2207.13332/) (2022)
- [Evaluating Correctness and Faithfulness of Instruction-Following Models for Question Answering](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.16877/) (2023)
- [Certifiably Robust RAG against Retrieval Corruption](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.15556/) (2024)
- [Rich Knowledge Sources Bring Complex Knowledge Conflicts: Recalibrating Models to Reflect Conflicting Evidence](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.13701/) (2022)
- [Evaluating ChatGPT's Information Extraction Capabilities: An Assessment of Performance, Explainability, Calibration, and Faithfulness](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.11633/) (2023)
- [The Earth is Flat because...: Investigating LLMs' Belief towards Misinformation via Persuasive Conversation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2312.09085/) (2023)
- [InstructRAG: Instructing Retrieval-Augmented Generation via Self-Synthesized Rationales](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.13629/) (2024)
- [Tug-of-War Between Knowledge: Exploring and Resolving Knowledge Conflicts in Retrieval-Augmented Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.14409/) (2024)
- [Trustworthiness in Retrieval-Augmented Generation Systems: A Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2409.10102/) (2024)
- [Scaling Retrieval-Based Language Models with a Trillion-Token Datastore](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.12854/) (2024)
- [Don't Forget to Connect! Improving RAG with Graph-based Reranking](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.18414/) (2024)
- [Blinded by Generated Contexts: How Language Models Merge Generated and Retrieved Contexts When Knowledge Conflicts?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.11911/) (2024)
- [Open Domain Question Answering with Conflicting Contexts](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.12311/) (2024)

## Built on by (most cited first, 3 of 3)

- [KnowRL: Teaching Language Models to Know What They Know](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.11407/) (2025)
- [Can AI Validate Science? Benchmarking LLMs for Accurate Scientific Claim rightarrow Evidence Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.08235/) (2025)
- [On the impact of retrieved content representations in RAG Pipelines](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.30790/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Incorporating external knowledge has emerged as a promising way to mitigate outdated knowledge and hallucinations in LLM. However, external knowledge is often imperfect, encompassing substantial extraneous or even inaccurate content, which interferes with the LLM's utilization of useful knowledge in the context. This paper seeks to characterize the features of preferred external knowledge and perform empirical studies in imperfect contexts. Inspired by the chain of evidence (CoE), we characterize that the knowledge preferred by LLMs should maintain both relevance to the question and mutual support among the textual pieces. Accordingly, we propose a CoE discrimination approach and conduct a comparative analysis between CoE and Non-CoE samples across significance, deceptiveness, and robustness, revealing the LLM's preference for external knowledge that aligns with CoE features. Furthermore, we selected three representative tasks (RAG-based multi-hop QA, external knowledge poisoning and poisoning defense), along with corresponding SOTA or prevalent baselines. By integrating CoE features, the variants achieved significant improvements over the original baselines.