# Do LLM Agents Know How to Ground, Recover, and Assess? A Benchmark for Epistemic Competence in Information-Seeking Agents

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2509.22391 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.22391/

## Key facts

- Cited by 7 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Web, search, and research agents, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use.
- Builds on 27 of its 39 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 26 Sep 2025.

## Placed in

- LLM agents and tool use / [Web, search, and research agents](https://mlsanity.com/agents/web-search-and-research-agents/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 27 of 27)

- [Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2201.11903/) (2022)
- [ReAct: Synergizing Reasoning and Acting in Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.03629/) (2022)
- [DeepSeek-R1: Incentivizing Reasoning Capability in LLMs via Reinforcement Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.12948/) (2025)
- [Qwen2.5 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.15115/) (2024)
- [HotpotQA: A Dataset for Diverse, Explainable Multi-hop Question Answering](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1809.09600/) (2018)
- [TriviaQA: A Large Scale Distantly Supervised Challenge Dataset for Reading Comprehension](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1705.03551/) (2017)
- [Search-R1: Training LLMs to Reason and Leverage Search Engines with Reinforcement Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.09516/) (2025)
- [Constructing A Multi-hop QA Dataset for Comprehensive Evaluation of Reasoning Steps](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2011.01060/) (2020)
- [When Not to Trust Language Models: Investigating Effectiveness of Parametric and Non-Parametric Memories](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.10511/) (2022)
- [Measuring and Narrowing the Compositionality Gap in Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.03350/) (2022)
- [MuSiQue: Multihop Questions via Single-hop Question Composition](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2108.00573/) (2021)
- [Siren's Song in the AI Ocean: A Survey on Hallucination in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.01219/) (2023)
- [R1-Searcher: Incentivizing the Search Capability in LLMs via Reinforcement Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.05592/) (2025)
- [DeepResearcher: Scaling Deep Research via Reinforcement Learning in Real-world Environments](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.03160/) (2025)
- [WebSailor: Navigating Super-human Reasoning for Web Agent](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.02592/) (2025)
- [The Landscape of Agentic Reinforcement Learning for LLMs: A Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.02547/) (2025)
- [Beyond Ten Turns: Unlocking Long-Horizon Agentic Search with Large-Scale Asynchronous RL](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2508.07976/) (2025)
- [Making Reasoning Matter: Measuring and Improving Faithfulness of Chain-of-Thought Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.13950/) (2024)
- [A Survey of LLM-based Deep Search Agents: Paradigm, Optimization, Evaluation, and Challenges](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2508.05668/) (2025)
- [Satori: Reinforcement Learning with Chain-of-Action-Thought Enhances LLM Reasoning via Autoregressive Search](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.02508/) (2025)
- [Direct Evaluation of Chain-of-Thought in Multi-hop Reasoning with Knowledge Graphs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.11199/) (2024)
- [ThoughtSource: A central hub for large language model reasoning data](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2301.11596/) (2023)
- [Premise-Augmented Reasoning Chains Improve Error Identification in Math reasoning with LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.02362/) (2025)
- [Mapping the Minds of LLMs: A Graph-Based Analysis of Reasoning LLM](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.13890/) (2025)
- [Agent models: Internalizing Chain-of-Action Generation into Reasoning models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.06580/) (2025)
- [InfoDeepSeek: Benchmarking Agentic Information Seeking for Retrieval-Augmented Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.15872/) (2025)
- [KG-TRACES: Enhancing Large Language Models with Knowledge Graph-constrained Trajectory Reasoning and Attribution Supervision](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.00783/) (2025)

## Built on by (most cited first, 7 of 7)

- [A Survey of Agent Memory in the Second Half: Towards Self-Evolving and Long-Horizon Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.06052/) (2026)
- [Time to REFLECT: Can We Trust LLM Judges for Evidence-based Research Agents?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.19196/) (2026)
- [Do Web Agents Investigate Before They Decide?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.05354/) (2026)
- [Co-ReAct: Rubrics as Step-Level Collaborators for ReAct Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.23590/) (2026)
- [When English Rewrites Local Knowledge: Global Narrative Dominance in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.30481/) (2026)
- [CIVI: A Framework for Diagnosing Search Agent Failures in Civic Information](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.08094/) (2026)
- [DoGBench: Can Agents Meet Expert Standards for User-Facing Documentation?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.39909/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Recent work has explored training Large Language Model (LLM) search agents with reinforcement learning (RL) for open-domain question answering (QA). However, most evaluations focus solely on final answer accuracy, overlooking how these agents reason with and act on external evidence. We introduce SeekBench, the first benchmark for evaluating the textitepistemic competence of LLM search agents through step-level analysis of their response traces. SeekBench comprises 190 expert-annotated traces with over 1,800 response steps generated by LLM search agents, each enriched with evidence annotations for granular analysis of whether agents (1) generate reasoning steps grounded in observed evidence, (2) adaptively reformulate searches to recover from low-quality results, and (3) have proper calibration to correctly assess whether the current evidence is sufficient for providing an answer.