# Evidence Interfaces Shape How Retrieval-Augmented Readers Use Support

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2607.17108 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2607.17108/

## Key facts

- Cited by 1 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in RAG robustness and adaptive retrieval, one of 15 directions in Retrieval-augmented generation.
- Builds on 13 of its 15 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 19 Jul 2026.

## Placed in

- Retrieval-augmented generation / [RAG robustness and adaptive retrieval](https://mlsanity.com/rag/rag-robustness-and-adaptive-retrieval/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 13 of 13)

- [Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Knowledge-Intensive NLP Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.11401/) (2020)
- [Parameter-Efficient Transfer Learning for NLP](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1902.00751/) (2019)
- [Dense Passage Retrieval for Open-Domain Question Answering](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2004.04906/) (2020)
- [HotpotQA: A Dataset for Diverse, Explainable Multi-hop Question Answering](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1809.09600/) (2018)
- [Lost in the Middle: How Language Models Use Long Contexts](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.03172/) (2023)
- [LongBench: A Bilingual, Multitask Benchmark for Long Context Understanding](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.14508/) (2023)
- [Constructing A Multi-hop QA Dataset for Comprehensive Evaluation of Reasoning Steps](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2011.01060/) (2020)
- [Atlas: Few-shot Learning with Retrieval Augmented Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2208.03299/) (2022)
- [MuSiQue: Multihop Questions via Single-hop Question Composition](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2108.00573/) (2021)
- [REPLUG: Retrieval-Augmented Black-Box Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2301.12652/) (2023)
- [Reading Wikipedia to Answer Open-Domain Questions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1704.00051/) (2017)
- [Passage Re-ranking with BERT](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1901.04085/) (2019)
- [RankRAG: Unifying Context Ranking with Retrieval-Augmented Generation in LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.02485/) (2024)

## Built on by (most cited first, 1 of 1)

- [What Would Fix This RAG Failure? Auditing Counterfactual Response with Paired Evidence Interventions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2608.08944/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

In multi-hop RAG evaluation, a top-k answer score can hide two different failures: the retrieval window may drop part of the support chain, or it may contain support in a form the adapted reader does not use well. We call this reader-facing form of retrieved evidence an evidence interface. Using three support-annotated multi-hop QA benchmarks, we compare matched adapted readers trained with raw context, retrieval windows, and gold-support diagnostic renderings. These comparisons distinguish support-availability failures from remaining reader-interface effects. Top-k windows become interpretable only after checking whether the complete annotated support chain survives: when it does, short ranked windows can match or improve over raw context; when it does not, missing support explains much of the loss. Gold support-first improves matched readers; on 2Wiki and MuSiQue, a support-supervised ranker raises coverage and recovers raw-context quality at lower prompt cost, while retaining gold headroom. Support-removal checks further show that the gains rely on exposed evidence, not only answer priors. On support-annotated evaluations, top-k answer scores should therefore be reported together with complete-support coverage.