MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7124297238 · doi:10.65109/wjjv5555

SCMRAG: Self-Corrective Multihop Retrieval Augmented Generation System for LLM Agents

2025· article· W7124297238 on OpenAlexaff
Rishabh Agrawal, Murtaza Asrani, Hadi Moulay Youssef, Apurva Narayan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldComputer Science
TopicTopic Modeling
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGraphBenchmark (surveying)Mechanism (biology)Similarity (geometry)Knowledge graphRange (aeronautics)Matching (statistics)Interaction information

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Existing Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) systems primarily depend on static knowledge vectorstores which combine semantic similarity algorithms with reranking. This often leads to outdated information and retrieval errors. In this paper, we propose SCMRAG, a Self-Corrective Multihop Retrieval Augmented Generation system for LLM agents. We introduce an LLM-assisted dynamic knowledge graph creation step to enhance information retrieval and mitigate hallucinations. Unlike traditional RAG systems, SCMRAG includes a self-corrective agent driven mechanism that autonomously identifies and retrieves missing information from external web sources. Furthermore, SCMRAG's internal reasoning agent determines whether the knowledge graph provides sufficient information or if a corrective step is needed. It further improves retrieval accuracy and efficiency. We benchmark the effectiveness of SCMRAG on five datasets - MultiHop-RAG, ARC AI2, PopQA, PubHealth, and WikiBio; showing significant improvements in retrieval precision and hallucination reduction across diverse tasks. Our results highlight SCMRAG's potential to redefine how LLM agents interact with knowledge bases, offering a more adaptable and reliable solution for a wide range of applications.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.893
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.037
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.252 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTopic ModelingFrench-language works237,207