mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

How Far Can Root Cause Analysis Go on Real-World Telemetry Data?

arXiv 2607.13548 ↗First posted 15 Jul 2026cs.AIcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Identifying root causes in production microservice failures requires reasoning over large-scale, multimodal telemetry spanning metrics, logs, and traces, a problem that has proved resistant to both classical and LLM-based approaches. The OpenRCA dataset exemplifies these challenges: it is large-scale, multimodal, and lacks detailed domain knowledge, and yields consistently low accuracy across all existing methods. We show that classical causal discovery methods and existing LLM-based multi-agent systems fail to reliably identify root causes on this benchmark, and present a Structured Multi-Agent RCA pipeline that substantially outperforms existing LLM-based and classical baselines, supporting both domain-knowledge and knowledge-free operating modes. To diagnose where failures originate, we introduce a reverse reasoning agent that, given the correct answer, identifies which signals in the extracted anomalies support it and determines whether Stage~1 had access to those signals, classifying each failure as Reasoning Gap (evidence present but unused) or Data Ambiguity (evidence genuinely absent). This analysis reveals that the required evidence is present in the vast majority of failures: the bottleneck is not data access but the agent's ability to reason over it correctly. We further introduce an automated rule mining pipeline that systematically extracts discrimination rules from reverse reasoning reports, reducing reliance on manual knowledge curation. Across all configurations, model reasoning capability and domain knowledge are the primary constraints: stronger models embed more domain expertise, and explicit knowledge injection partially compensates for this gap. Reasoning performance remains practically bounded even when evidence extraction is perfect: scaffold engineering and better data pipelines alone cannot close this gap; progress requires improvements at the model level.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 7 of its 11 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 15 Jul 2026.

Builds on

7 of 11 references.

References · 7

  1. 2024RCAEval: A Benchmark for Root Cause Analysis of Microservice Systems with Telemetry Datacited by 29
  2. 2025TAMO: Fine-Grained Root Cause Analysis via Tool-Assisted LLM Agent with Multi-Modality Observation Data in Cloud-Native Systemscited by 13
  3. 2025Adaptive Root Cause Localization for Microservice Systems with Multi-Agent Recursion-of-Thoughtcited by 13
  4. 2025GALA: Can Graph-Augmented Large Language Model Agentic Workflows Elevate Root Cause Analysis?cited by 5
  5. 2025TelecomTS: A Multi-Modal Observability Dataset for Time Series and Language Analysiscited by 5
  6. 2025LO2: Microservice API Anomaly Dataset of Logs and Metricscited by 3
  7. 2025Root Cause Analysis for Microservice Systems via Cascaded Conditional Learning with Hypergraphscited by 2

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026EviRCA: Decoupling Evidence Extraction from Reasoning for Microservice Root-Cause Analysis
  2. 2026Beyond Fault Localization: A Trajectory-Level Study of LLM Agents for Microservice Root Cause Analysis
  3. 2026Stalled, Biased, and Confused: Uncovering Reasoning Failures in LLMs for Cloud-Based Root Cause Analysis
  4. 2026GALA: Graph-Augmented LLM Agents for Root Cause Analysis and Incident Response in Microservices
  5. 2026STAR: A Stage-attributed Triage and Repair framework for RCA Agents in Microservices
  6. 2026Root Cause Analysis Method Based on Large Language Models with Residual Connection Structures
  7. 2026KRCA: An Efficient Root Cause Analysis System in Hyper-scale Microservice Systems via Agentic AI
  8. 2024Exploring LLM-based Agents for Root Cause Analysis