EWEK-QA : Enhanced Web and Efficient Knowledge Graph Retrieval for Citation-based Question Answering Systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The emerging citation-based QA systems are gaining more attention especially in generative AI search applications. The importance of extracted knowledge provided to these systems is vital from both accuracy (completeness of information) and efficiency (extracting the information in a timely manner). In this regard, citation-based QA systems are suffering from two shortcomings. First, they usually rely only on web as a source of extracted knowledge and adding other external knowledge sources can hamper the efficiency of the system. Second, web-retrieved contents are usually obtained by some simple heuristics such as fixed length or breakpoints which might lead to splitting information into pieces. To mitigate these issues, we propose our enhanced web and efficient knowledge graph (KG) retrieval solution (EWEK-QA) to enrich the content of the extracted knowledge fed to the system. This has been done through designing an adaptive web retriever and incorporating KGs triples in an efficient manner. We demonstrate the effectiveness of \ours over the open-source state-of-the-art (SoTA) web-based and KG baseline models using a comprehensive set of quantitative and human evaluation experiments. Our model is able to: first, improve the web-retriever baseline in terms of extracting more relevant passages (>20\%), the coverage of answer span (>25\%) and self containment (>35\%); second, obtain and integrate KG triples into its pipeline very efficiently (by avoiding any LLM calls) to outperform the web-only and KG-only SoTA baselines significantly in 7 quantitative QA tasks and our human evaluation.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.004 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".