Data-Efficient Auto-Regressive Document Retrieval for Fact Verification
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Document retrieval is a core component of many knowledge-intensive natural language processing task formulations such as fact verification. Sources of textual knowledge such as Wikipedia articles condition the generation of answers from the models. Recent advances in retrieval use sequence-to-sequence models to incrementally predict the title of the appropriate Wikipedia page given an input instance. However, this method requires supervision in the form of human annotation to label which Wikipedia pages contain appropriate context. This paper introduces a distant-supervision method that does not require any annotation train auto-regressive retrievers that attain competitive R-Precision and Recall in a zero-shot setting. Furthermore we show that with task-specific supervised fine-tuning, auto-regressive retrieval performance for two Wikipedia-based fact verification tasks can approach or even exceed full supervision using less than $1/4$ of the annotated data. We release all code and models
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it