mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Retrieval and Multi-Hop Reasoning in 1M-Token Context Windows: Evaluating LLMs on Classical Chinese Text

arXiv 2605.02173 ↗First posted 4 May 2026cs.AIcited by 0

On the map: LLM reasoning → Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation

Abstract (arXiv)

We evaluate the long-context retrieval and reasoning capabilities of five frontier large language models with advertised 1M-token context windows on a classical Chinese corpus. Two complementary studies are reported. Test 1 measures single-needle retrieval at 1M tokens of input, with three biographical needles planted at three depths and pairs of real (training-prior-consistent) and altered (training-prior-contradicting) variants to separate genuine in-context retrieval from reliance on memorised training data. Test 2, a follow-up designed to probe whether long-context capability degrades when retrieval requires intermediate reasoning, measures three-hop chain traversal across three context tiers (256K, 512K, and 1M tokens). We find that single-needle retrieval at 1M is essentially solved for the strongest models - Gemini 3.1 Pro, Claude Opus 4.7, and GPT-5.5 each achieve 100% - but that multi-hop performance reveals three distinct decay signatures: a stable regime (Gemini Pro, Claude) maintaining greater than 80% accuracy through 512K with modest degradation at 1M; a late-cliff regime (GPT-5.5, Qwen3.6-plus) collapsing sharply between 512K and 1M; and a smooth-decline regime (DeepSeek V4 Pro) decaying gradually across the entire range. The findings suggest that nominal context-window length is a poor proxy for usable long-context multi-hop capability, and that the sharpest discriminator between current 1M-context flagships is the 512K-to-1M transition.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning. First posted on arXiv 4 May 2026.

Builds on

0 of 0 references.

No references here yet.

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2023LongBench: A Bilingual, Multitask Benchmark for Long Context Understanding
  2. 2024NeedleBench: Evaluating LLM Retrieval and Reasoning Across Varying Information Densities
  3. 2025Can LLMs reason over extended multilingual contexts? Towards long-context evaluation beyond retrieval and haystacks
  4. 2025Reasoning on Multiple Needles In A Haystack
  5. 2026Understanding Axes of Difficulty For Long Context Tasks Via PredicateLongBench
  6. 2024Long-context Language Models Fail in Basic Retrieval Tasks Without Sufficient Reasoning Steps
  7. 2025Benchmarking Chinese Commonsense Reasoning with a Multi-hop Reasoning Perspective
  8. 2026Evaluating Multi-Hop Reasoning in RAG Systems: A Comparison of LLM-Based Retriever Evaluation Strategies