Look It Up: Analysing Internal Web Search Capabilities of Modern LLMs
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
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.
Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 23 of its 45 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 24 Nov 2025.
Builds on
23 of 45 references.
References · 23
- 2021BEIR: A Heterogenous Benchmark for Zero-shot Evaluation of Information Retrieval Modelscited by 1,252
- 2023Mind2Web: Towards a Generalist Agent for the Webcited by 1,242
- 2025BrowseComp: A Simple Yet Challenging Benchmark for Browsing Agentscited by 647
- 2024AgentHarm: A Benchmark for Measuring Harmfulness of LLM Agentscited by 437
- 2024Agent-SafetyBench: Evaluating the Safety of LLM Agentscited by 306
- 2025WebWalker: Benchmarking LLMs in Web Traversalcited by 175
- 2024The BrowserGym Ecosystem for Web Agent Researchcited by 161
- 2021A Dataset for Answering Time-Sensitive Questionscited by 154
- 2021SituatedQA: Incorporating Extra-Linguistic Contexts into QAcited by 145
- 2023T-Eval: Evaluating the Tool Utilization Capability of Large Language Models Step by Stepcited by 93
- 2025Mind2Web 2: Evaluating Agentic Search with Agent-as-a-Judgecited by 76
- 2023LLatrieval: LLM-Verified Retrieval for Verifiable Generationcited by 52
11 more
- 2024Dated Data: Tracing Knowledge Cutoffs in Large Language Modelscited by 51
- 2023The Perils & Promises of Fact-checking with Large Language Modelscited by 31
- 2023Are Large Language Models Temporally Grounded?cited by 27
- 2024Cocktail: A Comprehensive Information Retrieval Benchmark with LLM-Generated Documents Integrationcited by 17
- 2025Alignment for Efficient Tool Calling of Large Language Modelscited by 17
- 2024GrowOVER: How Can LLMs Adapt to Growing Real-World Knowledge?cited by 11
- 2025Real-time Ad retrieval via LLM-generative Commercial Intention for Sponsored Search Advertisingcited by 8
- 2025KnowRL: Teaching Language Models to Know What They Knowcited by 5
- 2025DailyQA: A Benchmark to Evaluate Web Retrieval Augmented LLMs Based on Capturing Real-World Changescited by 3
- 2024FAQ-Gen: An automated system to generate domain-specific FAQs to aid content comprehensioncited by 2
- 2025Mirage of Mastery: Memorization Tricks LLMs into Artificially Inflated Self-Knowledgecited by 2
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 3.
3 papers.