The Fellowship of the Query: Learning Retrieval Actions
On the map: Retrieval-augmented generation → Agentic RAG, agents and memory also fits: Generation and context integration
Abstract (arXiv)
Retrieval-augmented question answering requires control decisions about when to decompose a question, search, reformulate, extract evidence, synthesize facts, verify progress, and stop. We study whether trajectory fine-tuning can improve small language models (SLMs) as next-action controllers. We additionally evaluate a low-resource setting in which a single SLM serves as both the controller and the final-answer generator. From accepted teacher search traces, we build a seven-way action-prediction task, where the model predicts the next structured teacher action from the current trajectory state, and evaluate LoRA-supervised fine-tuning across SLMs and xSLMs as controllers. On 1,646 held-out action examples, Granite 4.1 3B trained on 13,194 actions reaches macro-F1 0.6536, compared with 0.1736 for zero-shot prompting of the same model and 0.5399 for a TF-IDF logistic-regression baseline. In an end-to-end controller/generator swap evaluation over 149 held-out trajectories, using the fine-tuned model for both roles improves Exact Match from 0.7530 to 0.7946 and token F1 from 0.7783 to 0.8295 compared with using the base model as both controller and generator. The cross-role conditions show that the fine-tuned controller increases evidence-fact recording when the generator is fixed, while controller-only final-answer gains are not statistically clear. Overall, trajectory supervision improves action prediction and evidence-recording behaviour in this evaluated pipeline. Code is available at https://github.com/padas-lab-de/agent-action-controller
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Agentic RAG, agents and memory, one of 15 directions in Retrieval-augmented generation. Builds on 12 of its 24 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 23 Sep 2026.
Builds on
12 of 24 references.
References · 12
- 2020Measuring Massive Multitask Language Understandingcited by 7,768
- 2018Think you have Solved Question Answering? Try ARC, the AI2 Reasoning Challengecited by 4,710
- 2016SQuAD: 100,000+ Questions for Machine Comprehension of Textcited by 4,115
- 2019HellaSwag: Can a Machine Really Finish Your Sentence?cited by 4,018
- 2018HotpotQA: A Dataset for Diverse, Explainable Multi-hop Question Answeringcited by 3,686
- 2023Self-RAG: Learning to Retrieve, Generate, and Critique through Self-Reflectioncited by 1,800
- 2025Search-R1: Training LLMs to Reason and Leverage Search Engines with Reinforcement Learningcited by 1,371
- 2020Constructing A Multi-hop QA Dataset for Comprehensive Evaluation of Reasoning Stepscited by 1,259
- 2024MiniCPM-V: A GPT-4V Level MLLM on Your Phonecited by 1,061
- 2022Interleaving Retrieval with Chain-of-Thought Reasoning for Knowledge-Intensive Multi-Step Questionscited by 911
- 2021MuSiQue: Multihop Questions via Single-hop Question Compositioncited by 893
- 2024Lessons from the Trenches on Reproducible Evaluation of Language Modelscited by 172
Built on by
Not cited yet.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2025Think Before You Retrieve: Learning Test-Time Adaptive Search with Small Language Models
- 2026Beyond Self-Knowledge: Propagating Uncertainty Across Reasoning and Retrieval in LLMs
- 2026The Path Matters: Evaluating Small Language Models Beyond Answer Accuracy in KGQA
- 2024Learning From Failure: Integrating Negative Examples when Fine-tuning Large Language Models as Agents
- 2026Evaluating Confidence-Gated Retrieval with Matched Trajectory Replay
- 2026To Memorize or to Retrieve: Scaling the Interaction Between Pretraining and Retrieval
- 2026Retrieval-Augmented LLM Agents: Learning to Learn from Experience
- 2025Socratic Students: Teaching Language Models to Learn by Asking Questions